= b PB 295 812 DOT HS 803 021 ANALYTICAL STUDY NO. 6 AN ANALYSIS OF ALCOHOL REHABILITATION EFFORTS D. A. REEDER G. L. DAVIDSON M. J. MILLER MAUCHLY WOOD SYSTEMS CORPORATION 102 SOUTH 27TH SUITE i00 BOISE, ~AHO 83706 Contract No. DOT HS-153-2-239 Contract Amt. $2,279,944 r I clo ml n,4TES u- PRINTED MAY 1979 FINAL REPORT This document is available to the U.S. public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161 Prepared For UoS. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Washington, D.C. 20590 If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov.
Transcript
= b
PB 295 812 DOT HS 803 021
ANALYTICAL STUDY NO. 6 AN ANALYSIS OF ALCOHOL REHABILITATION EFFORTS
This document is available to the U.S. public through the National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, Virginia 22161
Prepared For UoS. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Washington, D.C. 20590
If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov.
This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange, The United States Govern- ment assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof,
Technica l Report Documentat ion P a g e
| . Report No.
DOT HS 803 021
2. Government Accession No,
4. Title and Subtitle
Analyt ical Study #6 An ANalysis of Alcohol Rehabi l i tat ion Effor ts
7. Author" s)
9. Performing Org~izotion Name ~ d Address
Mauchly-Wood Systems Corporation
12. ~onsoring Agency Name ~ d Add,ass
~lational Highway Traffic Safety Administration 400 Seventh Street, S.W. Washington, D. C. 20590
3. Recipient's Catalog No.
5. Report Date
May 1976 6. Performing Organization Code
8. Pertorming Organization Report No.
10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)
I i . Contract or Grant No.
DOT-HS - 153 -2 -239 13. Type of Report and Period Covered
Evaluation Report 1973-1975
|4., Sponsoring Agency Code
15. Supplementary Notes
]6. Abstract
The Idaho ASAP began in June of 1972 and ,,,as in ful l oPera~n~b~L=~1~t~l~ 1972. All other countermeasures were successfully implemented and functioned throughout the operational project period.
In June of 1975, a f ter three years of operation, the f u l l federal funding of the program expired. However, a modified version of the program was continued under state funding. The regienal ASAP coordinators were discontinued and only the central project d i rector in Boise was continued. The Public !nformation and Education countermeasure was discontinued. The ASAP Enforcement Patrol of twenty-six specia l ly trained state policemen, the presentence invest igat ion team, and the ASAP project management continued, using state funding drawn from a two percent state l iquor tax surcharge. The Alcohol Data Bank and the Evaluation Information System were continued under a special ASAP evaluation extension in order to report on the effectiveness of the ASAP in i t s modified version.
Although the Idaho ASAP and its integrated countermeasure approach has expired, many of the functions will continue.
17. Key Word=
i~. ~cu6 ty Clo==if. (oi ~ i s repot,)
U~classif ied
Fo~r,~ DOT F 1700.7 (~-7~)
|8. Oistrlbution Statement
Document is available to the U.S. Public through the National Technical Information Service Spr ingf ie ld , V i rg in ia 22161
I ~ . ~ecurity Cio==iL (of thi* pool,m) T 2~- ito. of ?~;e=
Unclassif ied 1 ~ 1 . ~
Rep,'oduc,~on of completed ;)o00 ~uthorizocl
22. Price
• • • • • • • • • • •
S y m l l o l
Apptouimnlo Convl~lionl to Melwic Memsu,es
Wile VIII Illlew Melliply by To Pond. Symbol
in
I t
v i i
m*
. i I
|h
LENGTH
* . , h ~ ! "2 .S ~ m l t l . . , h . , • , . ,
I~e l ] f l ~ . 1 1 . , . i , . , . , - ,
vn ,d" ; 0.~) ,~,.o..... . -
, . , l , .~ 1.6 k ,IIIIS~I*'¢ ~ I***,
ARIA
• ,ItoSlil' ¥ . s # d ~ O , R % l l i , . * , * . * , . , t * , o • * . , "
~, , l . l l le . .Ol .~ ~.~ ~I'*-***" k ) h l . o , t * . , l km ?
.if i ~ 0 .4 h i , i i . i l l .~ l l . i
MASS Iweighll
e e l : e 5 ~'R q~.im,~ q
I.m I ~ l q O. 4l~ k * I i . I t , i ra• k , i
%hiNt Ofllt5 ~ q IIHIIIF% I
| 711(K) i b l
VOLUME
I h • p I , Ih lp ~lXl~ln~ I§ m * l h h * * . , ~ m l
I I no l lq l l l l INIII(P~ ]0 . * i I l l h I * . l % n, l
C I IIII1 O . ~ l I, tl.I • |
pI p , ' l • Q l / h lP *~ I
t i t t l l l i l l l • I),!|~ h l l , l • l
l i ' I I q. tl l l '~41 I . ~ h l l , l ~ I I
II l * ill~*o l p p l O.OI ~ l l l l l l l..*.l*.l.. II.
v d I *~[Ih,( v n l d s 0 ,76 r l , b . n.,I,.o% I~**
lEMPIRA'TUnE Ittoct!
f ' ~ l h lP .hn , I 5 9 I , I l l ~ l
IP.n l l~ l~ l l l l l l " • l l h l l , i i I ir l~
METRIC CONVERSION FACTORS
---.
o,
u,
o o,
o.
I -
o
_o .
" i . . . . e.
Symbol
App¢omimmll Conve,sions hem Mehic Meemv,es
When Yon Knew MvII0plv i v I t l i n d Symbol
LENGTH
,,~, m l l l l ~ t l . l l 0 0 i i n t k p * i n
, m Cen l ,m~ le , ~ 0 4 ,n [h~ • i n
k ' " Ii * IiIn~p IpI • 0 ~ p l l p ~ ~ *
• ,,,/
7 km
h *
ARIA
i p r i Iq4 iw pe t I l f l P I i O. 16 i i 1 U l l l , l~-hl~l
IIIIIAIP n l P I P l l | ~ I | u l w e l l f , I I
I .qql i lp I l t l l l ~ t l e # l 0 i lqu411~p m)lpql
he~ I.~.,r~ I IO.OflO n , " l ;P 5 I c i e r .
MASS (Wlilhl |
,I ~ I r n ~ O.O)S c * ~ ( e s
I,,i I,, ' - . l . ~ q 1 1 I x ~ n d s
I l e e ~ I lO l )0 kil l) I . I • h a l l t i r o l
VOLUME
m, )
_T_I MP[RATUR! leucl l
(~e t l l , , 1 11 1~ | lh~-n # ml~q4,mke,~
t Pq~'IlPl l l l l l II 11111 |71 I l l ' l l l e l I t ell I
*f
4 0 0 l * o O0 L I , O I . 0 } O f , | • • • v I A | i • • • • • • ! l i ir v v aT • i i
t ' ! i ' , ' ' e l U t ! ?t' l I J40 l 0 8 ~ 10{) • 4 { , * - 7 0
o c IF ° C
m l m , | h h t e * e 0 0 ~ f | u i d o i j m ' e l |1 o f
I hlrpf $ ~. I p , n l s p l
I I I* te, ~ O.~P6 QAll l 'mq ee l nt rllhl( mptpf~ )Ij ct lh*~ I I ~ t f t t
. , t t . 1 , . . v . t r , • ! , ] ¢uh l~ ward1 Vd !
[
O
r
t
l
@ I L
L
{
S e c t i o n
1.0 1.1 1.2 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5
3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4
8 . 0
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Description
Table of Contents List of Exhibits Abstract
I n t r o d u c t i o n Description of the ASAP Community Evaluation Information System Characteristics of the Idaho Rehabilitation System Flow Through the Idaho Judicial Rehabilitation Systems Rehabilitation Modality Assignment Criteria Rehabilitation Participation Incentives in Idaho Rehabilitation Floow Up and Monitoring Interaction of ASAP with Community Treatment Resources and the Courts Effectiveness of Rehabilitation Analysis of Rehabilitation Modality Profiles Profile Development Methodology Profile Analysis of Treatment Groups Methodolo ~ Significance of the Difference Between Percentages Significance of the Difference Between Means Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test for Goodness of Fit 't' Test of Significance Between Two Sample Means (Paired Variates) Supplemental Information
ASAP Community Descriptor Alcohol Data Bank D a t a Elements Characteristics of the Idaho Rehabilitation System Combined Alcohol Referral and Fducation Services [CARES) Participating Agencies Survey of Idaho Alcohol Rehabilitation Facilities Summary of Treatment Characteristics Possible Agencies for Referral by DICP Counselor Idaho Judicial~Rehabilitation Flow Chart Judicial~Rehabilitation Flow Volumes Distribution of Referrals Rehabilita£ion Referrals by Drinker Class Recidivism Rates for Treatment Modalities Distribution of Drinker Classifications by Treatment Modality Modality Order by Alcohol Involvement A1 cobol-Related Profile Indicators Demographic Characteristics of Profiles Profile Data BAC Distributions Employment Status Marital Status Income Age Distribution Education Table of CR Values Table of Areas of the Normal Curve Acceptance Limits for the Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test of Goodness of Fit Table for 't' Test of Significance Between Two Sample Means 1975 Not Referred 1975 Referred 1975 CAS 1975 DICP 1975 DDC 1975 CAS ~ DICP 1975 CAS ~ DDC 1975 CAS ~ Other 1975 Other Rehab 1975 No Treatment Non-Recid 1975 No Treatment Recid 1975 CAS Recid 1975 CAS Non-Recid 1975 DICP Non-Recid 1975 DICP Recid 1975 CAS 6 DICP Recid 1975 CAS 5 DICP Non-Recid
i i
Pag__.~e
10 11 14 16 20 27 28 28 33
35 36 38 39 41 46 47 48 49 50 51 53 56
59
61 63 68 73 78 83 88 93 98
103 108 113 118 123 128 133 138 143
[
[i 0
f
J [
I
[
ti
t
t
ABSTRACT
Analytic study Number 6 is directed toward the evaluation of Alcohol Rehabilita- tion efforts in the ASAP community. Since there are no National Highway Traffic Safety Administration monies and no centralized rehabilitation referral center, data for evaluation is collected from court referral records, Court Alcohol School attendance forms and Driver Improvement Counseling actions.
Section i presents a brief introduction and description of the ASAP community.
Section 2 of this study deals with the characteristics of the Idaho Rehabilitation system. Included is a description of the individual treatment modalities and a flowchart of the judicial~rehabilitation system.
Section S addresses the effectiveness of various treatment modalities in terms of recidivism rates.
We found no significant differences in the no treatment modality when measured against any treatment modality. We also found no significant differences in the composite treatment modality when measured against any treatment modality. We expected to find that some treatment would reduce recidivism rates and suspected that a distribution of drinker classifications might provide a reason why we found none.
We found that Court Alcohol School was the only modality that had a significantly lower (P<.01) number of problem drinkers. That was disturbing because by the definition of a problem drinker, we expected the recidivism rates for Court Alcohol School to be significantly lower also.
We found that the Driver Improvement Counseling Program had a significantly higher (P< .01) number of problem drinkers than the no treatment, composite treatment or Court Alcohol School modalities. This was encouraging because the siEni ficant overrepresentation of problem drinkers in the DICP modality did not produce a significant difference in the recidivism rate.
We p e r f o r m e d the same c o m p a r i s o n on Cour t A l c o h o l Schoo l w i th DICP and t h e com- p o s i t e o f Cour t A lcoho l School mud DICP. We found b o t h DICP and t h e c o m p o s i t e o f CAS and DICP t o be s i g n i f i c a n t l y o v e r r e p r e s e n t e d w i t h p rob lem d r i n k e r s , w h e t h e r c l a s s i f i e d as such by a p r e s e n t e n c e i n v e s t i g a t i o n or e s t i m a t e d by t h e E v a l u a t i o n I n f o r m a t i o n Sys tem.
Section 4 presents profile comparisons of various treatment and no treatment groups.
iii
[ '[
I: P
[
J
.(
l
[ D
L
(_
i . 0 INTRODUCTION
This report is an analysis of the full three operational years of the Idaho Alcohol Safety Action Project (ASAP). This is the fourth in a series of annual analytic studies which are written in an effort to determine the effects of the project in Idaho. The first series of studies dealt with only six months of operational data collected during the start-up period. The present series of studies will primarily analyze the data collected during 1973, 1974 and 1975. Data previous to 1973 is mainly indicative of the drinker-driver situation before the ASAP began impacting the community towards the close of 1972.
The Idaho ASAP began in June of 1972 and was in full operation by September of 1972. Twelve countermeasures, as listed below, were utilized in the design of the project:
• Project Management • Hnforcement • Judicial and Prosecution Assistance • Expert Witness/Chemical Laboratory • Education~Re-education • Rehabilitation • Driver Testing, Licensing and Regulation • Public Information and Education • Legislative and Regulatory • Medical Advisory Board • Alcohol Data Bank • Information Services
The Prosecution Assistance function was intended to aid monetarily in the prose- cution of DWI cases, but was discontinued due to resistance from the prosecution office. A team of twelve presentence investigators was created and functional throughout the project period. These investigators reviewed the background of convicted DWI's and presented recommendations on sentencing and rehabilitation.
The medical advisory board, intended to develop criteria for withholding licenses for medical reasons, was not implemented and was also discontinued. This function is carried out by the Idaho Licensing sub-division of the Department of Law Enforce- ment.
All other countermeasures were successfully implemented and functioned throughout the operational project period.
In June of 1975, after three and one-half years of operation, the full federal funding of the program expired and the program was continued, although in a somewhat modified version. The Public Information and Education countermeasure was discontinued. The ASAP enforcement patrol of twenty six specially trained state policemen and the presentence investigation team and the ASAP project management continued, using state funding drawn from a three percent state liquor tax surcharge. The Alcohol Data Bank and the Evaluation Information System were continued under a special ASAP evaluation extension in order to report on the effectiveness of the ASAP in its modified version. The remainder of the countermeasure functions were continued in the state agencies in which they originally evolved.
In June of 1976, the ASAP project management will be discontinued. However, two countermeasures which are perhaps the most effective will be continued. The team of presentence investigators will be continued under the Probation and Parole Department and under this agency their function will be extended to criminal as well as DWI offenses. The ASAP Alcohol Emphasis Patrol will be continued as long as their funding is renewed each year by the legislature.
The final post-ASAP analytic studies will be completed in June of 1977.
This study is Analytic Study Number 6 of the series, An Analysis of Alcohol Rehabilitation Efforts. This report will describe the flow of arrested DWI's through the court, presentence investigation and rehabilitation systems and will analyze those pertinent aspects of each system that are related to ASAP goals and operations. Referral mechanisms utilized by the Idaho ASAP will also be discussed.
The report is organized so as to be Of optimum value to the reader at whatever level of detail he is interested in. An abstract at the beginning provides a nutshell summary of results and conclusions elaborated on in the text. The results and conclusions are separated, so that the casual reader may absorb the direction of the report without having to scan through the detailed narrative. A brief description of the ASAP community and of the information system used to develop the data is included in each study, so that each report may be used separately, if desired, without referencing other documents. Data is presented in visual displays wherever possible to impart the greatest amount of meaning with the least amount of effort on the part of the reader. For the benefit of the reader who is approaching with a view toward critical analysis of the evaluation s y s t e m , t h e d a t a which was used to p r e p a r e the c h a r t s and graphs i s r e p r o d u c e d i n t h e d a t a t a b l e s i n c l u d e d as append i ce s a t t he end o f each r e p o r t . I n - d e p t h d i s c u s s i o n s o f me thodo logy and r a t i o n a l e b e h i n d the methodology chosen a r e l a b e l e d so t h a t t h e y may be s k i p p e d o v e r by a l l bu t t he aud iences f o r which t h e y were i n t e n d e d .
0
I
Q
1
!
l
{
I-
) !"
-)
!
I
i. 1
] .
J ]-
[
[
I
E
[
L
E
[
i.I DESCRIPTION OF THE ASAP COMMUNITY
In order to understand the nature of the drinking driving problem with which the Idaho ASAP must deal, an understanding of the characteristics of the community is desirable. Exhibit I.i-I presents a summary of community descriptor data relating to the Idaho ASAP. Other less tangible aspects of the Idaho ASAP community are also described in this section.
Idaho is a largely rural s t a t e of approximately five hundred miles in length and three hundred miles in width. Most of the inhabitants live in population centers under S0,000. There are approximately 56,000 miles of roads in the state with only 142 state patrolmen in addition to local enforcement to provide traffic law enforcement. Many of the state's roads are through winding mountainous areas which are slick with ice and snow in the winter. There is a migrant farm labor population during the summer, along with Indian reservations and military bases which account for a disproportionate number of DWI offenders. During the recre- ational season, normal traffic is swelled with a large tourist population. All these factors combine to make Idaho's fatality rate the fourth highest in the nation.
Against these factors, the Idaho ASAP is attempting to reduce alcohol-related fatality and injury accidents, but there are many obstacles. The extent of the drinking problem is severe with the average positive BAC (before ASAP) being 15 percent. It is illegal in Idaho to publicly identify the BAC of a fatally injured driver, so that this must be done indirectly with many BAC samples going unmatched, unidentified, not submitted, taken after four hours from the time of the accident, or contaminated with embalming fluid. Less than 50 percent Of the fatal blood samples are received. Most recordkeeping is done manually and the few automated systems that do exist keep only that data required for internal use, and much of this is entered with no data verification. The drinking age was lowered to 19 in July of 1972. There is no lesser violation to which a DWI can be plea bargained down to and still retain its indication as an alcohol-involved arrest. A DWI is routinely treated as a misdemeanor. Subsequent DWI violations may be treated as a felony, but this requires special action on the part of the prosecutor. Withheld judgements are not considered to be convictions by the court, and they are not always included in the driver's record.
According to current statutes, it is legal to have an open container of beer in the driver's compartment, because the amount of alcohol in beer does not meet the definition of an alcoholic beverage. These factors combine to make alcohol involve- ment a large factor in accidents.
In o r d e r to opera te the ASAP p r o j e c t on a s t a t ewide b a s i s , Idaho has been d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e reg ions with a f u n c t i o n a l c o o r d i n a t o r r e p o r t i n g to P r o j e c t Management in each r eg ion . These r e g i o n a l c o o r d i n a t o r s ac t a s - a l o c a l i z e d manage- ment in each r eg ion and provide a id to the s epa ra t e countermeasures in c a r r y i n g out t h e i r o p e r a t i o n s . In a d d i t i o n , these c o o r d i n a t o r s oversee the r o a d s i d e surveys and address c i v i c groups and var ious community o r g a n i z a t i o n s , t he r eby a i d i n g in the d i s s e m i n a t i o n of i n fo rma t ion r e g a r d i n g ASAP goals and a c t i v i t i e s and s o l i c i t i n g p u b l i c suppor t .
* Equivalent Drinks: 12 oz. beer = 4 oz. wine - 1.5 oz. liquor ** Based on population respectively for 1973, 1974 and 1975 of 776,000, 779,000, and 825,000.
1974-1975 Variance
- 7.4%
14.3% 9.6%
- .6%
- 6.2%
2.9%
9.7%
8.2%
-15.7% - 4.3%
-14.1% - 1.8%
-21.6%
-15.7% -20.7%
-11.4%
-14.9%
• • • • • • • • e • •
-[
[ -[
[ 0
[
[
I
L
L
[
4
ASAPproject personnel consists of a project director, an assistant project director, and three regional coordinators. A functional coordinator for each countermeasure represents the agency which is directly involved in the counter- measure activities. Active countermeasures are Evaluation, Public Information, Project Management, Court Alcohol School (Alcohol Safety School), Driver Testing and Licensing, Driver Regulation, Magistrate Training, Alcohol Emphasis Patrol, Social Rehabilitation, Chemical Laboratory and Expert Witness, and the Alcohol Data Bank. Inactive countermeasures are the Medical Advisory Board and Prosecution Assistance.
The Chemical Laboratory i s opera ted by the Idaho S ta t e Department of Heal th and Welfare . Publ ic In format ion and Education has been subcon t rac ted to an a d v e r t i s i n g agency. The Court Alcohol School i s opera ted by the Sta te Department of Educat ion on a self-paying basis. Driver Testing, Licensing, and Regulation, along with Legal Advisory, are fulfilled by the State Department of Law Enforcement. The 26 man Alcohol Emphasis Patrol is managed by the Idaho.State Police. Eleven presentence investfgators and a supervisor are directed by a functional coordinator from the Supreme Court. Rehabilitation is provided by the Court Alcohol School established as an ASAP countermeasure, the Driver Improvement Counseling Program operated by the driver licensing division of the State Department of Law Enforce- ment, Defensive Driving Course and other rehabilitation agencies, such as Halfway House, AA, private hospitals, Mental Health facilities, and other available rehabilitation in each region.
Because of the lack of centralized administration of the State's rehabilitation facilities, and the independent operating characteristics of the local judiciaries, no attempt has been made to initiate control groups for the purpose of evaluating rehabilitation treatment modalities.
s /
[ [ [
E [
[
I
I I [
L L L [
L I I
1 .2 EVALUATION INFORAIATION SYSTEM
The evaluation of the Idaho ASAP was contracted to a private systems development corporation. In order to accomplish the objectives of evaluation, an Evaluation Information System was developed. This system is composed of an Alcohol Data Bank, the computer programs which create and maintain it; and the evaluation Computer programs which create Ap- pendix H quarterly and annual tables and data analyses included in the analytic studies. In addition, the project evaluators prepare the data collected from various agencies for data entry to the Alcohol Data Bank and aid Project ~lanagement in decision-making activities by pro- viding information and special reports on an on-request basis.
.
l~en the ASAP program was in the planning stage, alcohol-related data : ~¢as gathered by many different agencies for internal use in a multitude of data organization techniques. In order to facilitate the integration of data concerning each individual who came in contact with the ASAP system, the Alcohol Data Bank was established. This file acts as a central repository of data. concerning each individual and is organized so that pertinent data can be easily retrieved by authorized personnel to ~orm a case history of an individual. Data from participating agencies is collected on an on-going basis as subjects have initial or repeat contacts with an agency.
Exhibit 1.2-1 summarizes the data elements collected from various agencies within the ASAP system. All elements taken together constitute a very complete picture of the history and present status of any individual in the system. In practice, defendant data is complete only to the extent that it is collected by each agency. For instance, demographic data is available only for valid, licensed drivers. Out-of-state drivers and unlicensed drivers do, in fact, account for a significant number of drivers arrested for DWI. Other demographic data such as family income, education, employment status, occupation, religious preference, etc., is collected by the presentence investigator in approximately ninety percent of the investigations. Since presentence investigations are requested in 42~ of the convictions, then this data is present appro- ximately 37.8~ of the time. If a driver has recently moved to Idaho, then his driver history folder will not contain his past violations. A driver arrested for DWI who forfeits bond will not have a record of the arrest in the driver file unless the arrest was made by the Idaho State Police. Courts are only required to record convictions, and because withheld judgments are not considered to be convictions by the court, they go unreported unless the disposition was recorded by the Idaho State Police or a presentence investigator and reported to the Alcohol Data Bank.
As with all computer systems, the data that comes out is only as good as the data that goes in, and the Evaluation Information System is no exception. The pre-ASAP baseline data that was collected going back to the year 1959 reflects to a large extent the recent upgrades made to Idaho's traffic records data. The Department of Law Enforcement began recording DWI convictions statewide in 1969. Some records of withheld judgments were submitted by the courts, but none were entered on the driver records file. In 1969, only accidents that occurred on State and Federal highways were recorded centrally. In 1970, all accidents
[
F 0
[
I
[
[
[
1.2 EVALUATION IN~ORbiATION SYSTEM ( C o n t i n u e d )
were r e c o r d e d by the l o c a t i o n s in which t h e y o c c u r r e d , but t he l i c e n s e numbers of the p a r t i c i p a n t s were not r e c o r d e d . In 1972, the Department 6f Highways constructed a manual index from police and citizen's acci- dent reports to connect driver license numbers with accident report numbers. The index was b u i l t to ga in s t a t i s t i c a l da t a from the a c c i d e n t f i l e s , and i t was c r e a t e d u s ing no c o n t r o l s . The a c c i d e n t r e p o r t number changed format s e v e r a l t imes , f u r t h e r c o m p l i c a t i n g the matching p r o c e s s . In A p r i l 1972, the Department of Law Enforcement began i t s os~ a c c i d e n t index and the Department of Highways abandoned i t s a c c i d e n t i ndex , except fo r t he copy r e t a i n e d by ASAP. Using the combined a c c i d e n t index f i l e s of the two d e p a r t m e n t s , the a c c i d e n t h i s t o r y f i l e i s passed a g a i n s t the Alcohol Data Bank and a c c i d e n t segments a re added whenever t h e r e i s a match on d r i v e r s l i c e n s e numbers. Using t h i s t e c h n i q u e , 40% of the a c c i d e n t s r e q u e s t e d from the b a s e l i n e h i s t o r y tape were added to t he Alcohol Data Bank.
The e x t e n t o f a l c o h o l involvement i s u n d e r s t a t e d fo r the Pre-ASAP p e r i o d due to t he smal l number o f b'lood a l c o h o l t e s t s t aken and the low sample rate of autopsy BACs. The Had Been Drinking indicators on traffic tickets are seldom used by officers because they may become personally liable if they cannot furnish proof of the implication of drinking. Referrals to rehabilitation agencies are recorded when they are made by an ASAP presentence investigator. The actual attendance of the rehab is currently only known in the case of Court Alcohol School. In other cases, there are no records of no-shows, drops, or satisfactory completion.
7
EXHIBIT 1.2-1
ALCOHOL DATA BANK DATA ELEHENTS
I" Information Source
S u b j e c t Demographic Data L i c ense Suspens ion Data D r i v e r Improvement Counse l ing
Program Data Blood A lcoho l Tes t Data Court A l c o h o l A t t endance Data Autopsy BAC Data BAC T e s t R e f u s a l Data A c c i d e n t Data D r i v i n g V i o l a t i o n H i s t o r y
DLE Driver Licensing Data DLE Driver History File DLE Driver History File
DHSW Chem Lab Department of Educat ion DH~W Chem Lab DEE Dr iver Records DLE Accident History DLE Driver History File
DWI Conviction Data DWI Trial Data DWI Arrest Data Probation Follow-Up Data Records Check History Defendant Interview Data Family Interview Data Rehab Agency Contact Data Criminal Investigation Division
Data Employer Interview Drinker Classification
DLE Driver History File Presentence Investigator Idaho State Police Presentence Investigator Presentence Investigator Presentence Investigator Presentence Investigator Presentence Investigator Presentence Investigator
Presen tence I n v e s t i g a t o r P resen tence I n v e s t i g a t o r
Q
I. {
I•
I )
"I
[ -[:
0
[
[
I ,[
[
[ "L
2.0 CHARACTERISTICS OF THE IDAHO REHABILITATION SYSTEM
The Idaho Rehabilitation System consists of the public and private mental health facilities, and education and counseling programs that existed before the ASAP program was established, and the Court Alcohol School initiated as an ASAP counter- measure. The mental health facilities are mainly used for individuals with alcoholic dependencies and the few facilities that do exist are used heavily to L~ximize capacity. For social and non-problem drinkers, Court Alcohol School, Driver Improvement Counseling Program, and the Defensive Driving Course are the major referrals. Treatment for problem drinkers usually involves referral to one agency or perhaps one agency for physical rehabilitation and one for psychi- atric counseling, but there are no operational comprehensive treatment facilities except CARES for ASAP referrals which include tracking of clientele within the treatment facility.
The CARES Center (Combined Alcohol Referral and Education Services) was recently organized in Eastern Idaho. This center combines the services of eight agencies (Exhibit 2.0-2) into a single location with centralized administration oriented to refer clientele to appropriate participating agencies, and to track the indivi- dual through the steps of rehabilitation, noting violation and completion status. When fully implemented, a computerized monitoring system will provide the ability to do more detailed analysis of the relative success of treatment modalities on various groups of individuals.
A new statewide comprehensive substance abuse rehabilitation program was funded by NIAAA in October 1974. Data for analysis will not be available from this pro- gram until after the wrap-up of the Idaho Alcohol Safety Action Project.
2.0-1 DESCRIPTIONS OF INDIVIDUAL TREATMENT MODALITIES
The most frequent referrals involve combinations of Court Alcohol School, the Driver Improvement Counseling Program (DICP) and the Defensive Driving Course (DDC). A breakdown of referrals since project start-up is given below in Exhibit 2.0-1.
EXHIBIT 2.0-1 ASAP REHABILITATION REFERRALS
Modality 1972 1973 1974 1975- Total
I
No Treatment
Composite Treatment
Court Alcohol School
Driver Improvement Counseling Program
CAS ~ DICP
2147 4123 4409 3259 13939
403 1997 2125 1612 6137
108 767 846 620 2341
IS 190 305 165 675
2 49 61 12 122
Includes data for January - June 197S
/
EXHIBIT 2.0-2
COMBINED ALCOHOL REFERRAL AND EDUCATION SERVICES (CARES) PARTICIPATING AGENCIES
i •
.
A g e n c y
Alcohol Rehabilitation ~ Association, Inc.
Eastern Idaho Community Health Center
Idaho Adult Probation and Parole
4. ASAP
5. Court Alcohol School
.
.
.
Idaho Department of Health 5 Welfare Laboratory Division
Driver Improvement Counseling Program
Idaho Volunteers in Corrections
Function
Paraprofessional consulting services Men's residence Introduction to AA
Comprehensive Alcohol Treatment Program
Alcohol Information Center Industrial Alcohol Program Women's Residence
DWI probation
Presentence investigations Coordination of rehabilitation
programs
Alcohol Safety School for drinking drivers
Statewide alcohol program BAC testing
Driver counseling
Counseling
Exhibit 2.0-3 lists the rehabilitation facilities available within each ASAP region. There is no catalog of treatment programs other than the information specified in the exhibit. The presentence investigators within each region have a more detailed knowledge of the existing programs but this data has not been compiled and published. These treatment facilities do not use 403 funds as a source of revenue.
1O
-I I
I •
.J
•
EXHIBIT 2.0-3
SURVEY OF IDAHO ALCOHOL REHABILITATION FACILITIES
R e h a b i l i t a t i o n Treatment F a c i l i t y
ASAP Region 1 1 Hental Health Center I
2 Spokane, Washington
3 S ta te Hospi ta l North, Orofino
Co~anents
A. Ind iv idua l therapy B. Limited group therapy
A. Re fe r r a l s for comprehensive t rea tment
4 Mental Health Center I I 5 Halfway House, Lewiston 6 Nez Perce Tribe Alcohol Abuse Center
A. 2 week/6 week program B. Therapeut ic community t e s t i n g C. Ind iv idua l and group therapy D. Educat ion, medical back-up, and a f t e r - c a r e E. Alcoholism counselors
ASAP Region 2 1 Mental Health Center I I I
2 Nampa Mercy Hospi ta l
3 Alcohol R e h a b i l i t a t i o n Center (Halfway House)
4 Mental l tea l th Center IV
A. D e t o x i f i c a t i o n
A. Group and i nd iv idua l therapy B. Outpa t ien t groups C. Educat ional meetings D. Alcohol ics Anonymous
A. Group therapy B. Ind iv idua l therapy C. Tes t ing and eva lua t ion D. Group d i agnos t i c E. Evaluat ion p r i o r to sen tenc ing for DWIs as a
supplement to ASAP presen tence i n v e s t i g a t i o n s F. Medical and p s y c h i a t r i c (Antabuse t rea tment ) G. P a r t i a l ca re H, Family counse l ing
EXHIBIT 2 . 0 - 3 (Cont inued}
SORVEY OF IDAHO ALCOIIOL RE[L~BILITATION FACILITIES (Continued)
Rehabilitation Treatment Facility , , i 11
ASAP Region 2 (Continued) 5 Veterans Administration Hospital, Boise
6 S t . Alphonsus H g s p i t a l Mental Hea l th Un i t
7 Department of Health and Welfare satellite offices (Mountain Home and McCall)
8 Mountain Home Air Force Base
ASAP Region 3 1 blagic Valley Alcoholic Rehabilitation
Center, Twin Falls
2 Gateway Mental Health Center
3 St. Anthony Hospital
4 Halfway llouse, Pocatello
5 State Hospital South, Blackfoot
Comments
A. Referral to inpatient programs--Roseburgj American Lake, Sheridan
B. Emergency detoxification C. A f t e r c a r e f o r i n p a t i e n t t r e a t m e n t
A. Detoxification B. Recreational and occupational therapy C. Psychiatric counseling - D. Pre-release planning E. After care through RSAC
A. Intakes and referrals B. Psychologists providing therapy and IAP communi-
ty coordination
A. Social Actions Center for counseling B. Hospital with psychiatric social worker for
counseling
6 Idaho F a l l s Community Mental l l e a l t h C e n t e r
A. Halfway House B. Counseling
A. Individual therapy
A. Short-term detoxification
A. I n p a t i e n t c a r e B. L i a i s o n w i t h o t h e r men ta l h e a l t h c e n t e r s
A. Detoxification B. Testing and evaluation C. Psychiatric and medical services D. Outpatient counseling
1. Individual and group 2. Family
E. Antabuse supervision F. Two residential facilities
1. Male 2. Female--the only facility in Idaho for women
G. 30-60 days--residential program includes: I. Vocational counseling 2. Psychiatric care 3. ~anda tor ) , grmip a n d / o r i n d i v i d u a l t h e r a p y
• • O •
[
[
IL
[
E
!_
2.0.1 DESCRIPTIONS OF INDIVIDUAL TREATMENT MODALITIES (Continued)
Based on frequency of referral, these modality combinations were chosen for analysis. A description of each individual treatment modalities follows and summary data for each is included in Exhibit 2.0-4.
2.0. I. 1 DESCRIPTION OF COURT ALCOHOL SCHOOL
The Court Alcohol School is the drinker-driver education class established by ASAP and has been the single most frequently referred treatment facility. The goal of the Court Alcohol School is to increase the awareness of the convicted DWI of the hazards of drinking and driving. Ten percent of class time is spent on improving driving techniques and ninety percent on drinking behavior as it relates to driving. The classes are geared to first-time DWI offenders who are not judged to have severe drinking problems, in practice, because of the lack of rehabilitation programs, a large number of problem drinkers (21.9%) are referred to the program.
The Court Alcohol School course of instruction involves four sessions of two and one-half hours each. Courses are conducted on a monthly cycle. While drawing heavily upon materials developed by other ASAP's, the Idaho Court Alcohol School is basically patterned after the current Drug Education Program of the State Department of Education and incorporates several elements of the current SDE Defensive Driving Course.
The general content of each of the four class sessions are as follows:
Session i: Illustrates the underlying situations leading to arrest and discusses the reasons people use alcohol.
Session 2: Concentrates on discussions regarding the problems of drinking and driving. Myths regarding drinking and alcohol are explored. Elements of defensive driving are incorporated.
- Session 5: Continuation of the subject matter presented in Class 2.
Session 4: The final class session serves as a wrap-up, again using a "soft-sell" approach on drinking, such that the indi- viduals involved will hopefully make their own decisions as to why they drink and what they might do instead-- considering the perils of drinking-driving.
The minimum qualifications for Court Alcohol School instructors are:
• Strong background in dealing with social-related problems • Teaching experience • Must attend annual workshops
2.0.i.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE DRIVER IMPROVEMENT COUNSELING PROGRAM
The Driver Improvement Counseling Program (DICP) was crea ted in 1971 by the Department of Law Enforcement to provide counse l ing and d r i v e r r ehab i - l i t a t i o n to persons having d r iv ing problems. In those areas which r e l a t e to the Idaho Alcohol Safety Act ion P r o j e c t , the o b j e c t i v e of Driver Improve- ment Counseling Program is to help the "hard-core" d r ink ing d r i v e r .
13
. . . . . , : ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~
4~
.EXHIBIT 2 . 0 - 4
Length o f Program
Number of sessions Hours per session Size of sessions
Students per session Programs per year
Cost of Program Cost per program Instructor's fees Cost o f s t u d e n t
Program Sponsor
Annual R e f e r r a l s by ASAP Number r e f e r r e d p e r y e a r Average number r e f e r r e d p e r
month
D i s t r i b u t i o n o f c l i e n t s by age {from sample)
2.0.1.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE DRIVER IMPROVEMENT COUNSELING PROGRAM (Continued)
A driver may attend DICP for one of three reasons. He may be referred by the courts as a term of probation or withheld judgment, in lieu of having his license suspended after being convicted of an offense which carries an automatic license suspension or in lieu of having his license suspended for point accumulation due to traffic violations.
Once the subject agrees to attend the program, an initial interview is conducted by the DICP counselor to ascertain the subject's problem, the underlying causes and what can be done, if anything, to alleviate them. The counselor may use any of a number of community resources to help the subject improve his driving habits. Exhibit 2.0-5 lists the community resources which are used.
The counselor and the subject will establish a list of rules which the subject must agree to follow for 3, 6, 9 or 12 months. For example, the subject may agree to comply with the terms of his restricted license, not to drink and drive, to obey all traffic laws, to attend the Defensive Driving class, and to attend all subsequent DICP scheduled interviews (recall meetings). The counselor will then develop a schedule of monthly recall meetings to evaluate the subject's compliance and progress.
At the beginning of each recall meeting, the counselor reviews the subject's driver license file for recent violations and discusses the subject's driving behavior. If the counselor judges the participant to have corrected his driving deficiency, he may, at any time, restore full driving privileges.
• ° % ° ,
If the subject continues to accrue drlvlng vlolatlons, does not comply with the rules as agreed, or will not cooperate, he is dropped from the program, his restricted permit is revoked and, if applicable, the referring judge is notified of his non-compliance with the program. Every attempt is made to keep the subject in the program, including family telephone interviews to find out why the subject may be violating.
In addition to the interview at each recall session, group sessions may be scheduled in which a number of persons with similar driving problems attend a sound-on-slide presentation on various facets of driving behavior, such as Drinking Driving, Defense Driving, Rules of the Road, Driving A t t i t u d e s , e t c .
Records of DICP interviews, DICP completion and completion of Defensive Driving Course are filed in the driver license folder.
Not all DICP cases involve DWI offenders. Approximately 75.0 percent of the DICP cases handled in 1975 were DWI cases.
All counselors completed the "Basic Training Program for Driver Improve- ment Counselors" sponsored by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The course was taught by Chief Counselor, Paul Hale, who not only helped write the course but completed the training course for instructor of the basic course. This course was conducted under the direction of the Central Nashington State College in Ellensburg, Nashington, in December 1973. This will certify a11 counselors as having completed the latest comnrehensive training course available.
IS
2.0.1.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE DRIVER IMPROVEMENT COUNSELING PROGRAM (Continued)
EXHIBIT 2.0-5 POSSIBLE AGENCIES FOR REFERRAL BY DICP COUNSELOR
I
I"
i l Agency Rehabilitation Program or Activity
I. Department of Eduction
2. Department of Health and Welfare
3. Department of Employment
4. Medical Profession
S. Mental Health Units
6. Alcoholics Anonymous 7. Community Action Centers 8. Clergymen
A. Defensive Driving Course (Driver Rehabilitation Course)
B. Court Alcohol School (ASAP) C. School Counselors
A. Social Workers (Counseling) B. WIN Program (Female Training) A. Vocational Rehabilitation
(Physical ly Handicapped) A. Personal Physician B. Individual Evaluation of Drivers A. Individual Evaluation B. Group Therapy A. Alcholic Counseling A. Social and Neighborhood Programs A. Regular Church Services B. Individual Counseling
J
7 ~O
I®
16
J @ j
i@
~@
.[
[ "[
[
[
[
.I
I
[
[ "L
I
2.0.1.3 DESCRIPTION OF THE CARES CENTER
~"ne Combined Alcohol Referral and Education Services Center (CARES) opened in early March at 255 "B" Street in Idaho Falls, culminating many months of hard work and much patience to bring together, under one roof, all the services available to persons with alcohol-related problems.
This Cen te r provides a coordinated multi-agency rehabilitation program for problem drinkers. Under the one roof are representatives from the Alcohol Rehabilitation Association, Alcohol Safety Action Project, Eastern Idaho Community Mental Health Center, Driver Improvement and Counseling Program, State Parole and Probation, Volunteers in Probation, and the Department of Health and Welfare. Plans have been made to include Vocational Rehabi- litation in the Center in the near future.
The courts of the 7th Judicial District now have "one door" to refer subjects for a comprehensive education and/or rehabilitation program. This helps eliminate confusion for the client and also eliminates dupli- cation of agency effort. It provides the ASAP Presentence Investigator professional resources to help make a proper determination of subject's drinking problems and provides the rehabilitative resources and probation control to follow through on those persons in need of help.
The Center is funded with a grant from the Law Enforcement Planning Commis- sion, supplemented with funding from the Idaho Department of Health and Welfare.
2.0.1.4 DESCRIPTION OF DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND WELFARE SUBSTANCE ABUSE SERVICES
The Department of Health and Welfare expanded its service to alcoholics and problem drinkers through a federally-funded Services for Drinking-Drivers program. Out-patient programs for alcoholics are being implemented in all regions of the state and an in-patient alcohol treatment unit is functioning at Orofino, and another is planned for operation in Southern Idaho. These programs, when coordinated with health services provided by private hospitals for detoxification and available Halfway Houses, will help provide a contimuum of treatment care for the alcoholics.
It is also planned that regional out-patient treatment units will provide education and training programs in their respective areas of the state.
2.0.1.5 DESCRIPTION OF THE DEFENSIVE DRIVING COURSE
This cou r se i s a d m i n i s t e r e d by the Depar tment o f Educa t ion . I t c o n s i s t s of an eight-hour defensive driving course developed by the National Safety Council plus one hour of alcohol and drug education and one hour of Idaho traffic laws.
17
2.0.1.5 DESCRIPTION OF THE DEFENSIVE DRIVING COURSE (Continued)
The course is presented in four 2½-hour sessions and is administered in 26 areas of the state. Some 6,000 people attended the Defensive Driving Course in 1975.
The o b j e c t i v e o f t h e c o u r s e i s t o r e h a b i l i t a t e the e r r a n t d r i v e r .
I n s t r u c t o r s must h o l d a c u r r e n t Idaho T e a c h e r ' s C e r t i f i c a t e , be a c e r t i f i e d D r i v e r E d u c a t i o n T e a c h e r and a t t e n d a two-day workshop conduc ted by the D e p a r t m e n t o f E d u c a t i o n .
2.0.1.6 DESCRIPTION OF OTHER TREATMENT GROUPS
The category Other Treatment Groups referred to in the two modality combi- nations, Court Alcohol School and Other Rehab, and Other Rehab, may be one of the following:
1. Department of Health and Welfare, Comprehensive Treatment Plan 2. Department of Health and Welfare, Community Mental Health
Centers 3. Department of Health and Welfare, Mental Hospital s 4. Other Public Health Facilities 5. Private Hospitals/Physicians 6. Alcoholism Clinic 7. Employer Program 8. Halfway House 9. AA I0. Other Rehab
i• I
:I
}
I•
I
I"
18
3
[
[
[
d I
[
[ @
L
i [
2.1 FLOW THROUGH THE IDAHO JUDICIAL AND REHABILITATION SYSTEMS
The overall flow of ASAP case processing is shown in the operational flow diagram, Exhibit 2.1-I. This diagram presents estimated and actual volumes for each step in the procedure.
2.1.1 APPREHENDED DWI's
The most frequent mode of DWI identification is observation by enforcement officers. After observation, the suspect is stopped, interviewed and given the field dexterity test. If the test indicates the suspect has a higher BAC than .08, he is arrested and a breath sample for BAt analysis is obtained. The suspect is then taken to the station and booked.
2. I. 2 DWI ARRAIGk%IENT
When the arrested DWI offender is capable of conducting his affairs, he is taken before the local magistrate and arraignment on a charge of driving while intoxicated. The majority of arrested DWI's plead guilty at arraign- ment. Any plea bargaining initiated by the defence attorney usually follows arraignment. Cases not disposed of by a guilty plea or plea bargained to a lesser charge go to trial.
2.1.3 BLOOD ALCOHOL CONCENTRATION ANALYSIS
The State Department of Health and Welfare conducts a Blood Alcohol Concen- tration (BAC) analysis of the specimen submitted by enforcement personnel. The chemist conducting the analysis documents his findings in preparation for possible court appearance. This includes a discussion of methodology of BAC determination, the pharmacology of alcohol and findings of his specific analysis of the defendant's BAt.
2.1.4 TRIAL
When a defendant pleads not guilty, a trial date is set and the prosecuting attorney is notified to prepare his case. The prosecution prepares the "people's" case from facts contained in the arresting officer's report, the chemist's BAt report, and testimony from other witnesses.
The arresting officer reviews his notes and reports regarding the DWI incident prior to his court appearance.
The trial is conducted before a judge or jury. The prosecution uses testi- mony described in the preceding paragraphs. In most cases, a guilty verdict is obtained.
2 . 1 . S PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION
A convicted DWI will, in approximately 42-percent of the cases, be given a presentence investigation under the concept of mitigating background circumstances.
19
Cases Awaiting
Disp~si ~ion
1 V
EXHIBIT 2.1-i
Apprehend } DWI
Yes
Plea ~ ~s Bargain/~'-~
Convicted Non A/R Offenue
No f Guiltg
Defendan~ 1 Pl~ad Guilty]
__;°~ I
Idaho Judicial~Rehabilitation Flow Chart
2.~,IP AEP D~¢l" Arrest
I
Yes
Conduct ] [ trial I
Telmina~e
Term.~ r~ ~e
l
I °
I •
l
I !
.2
20
L
Ii
EXHIBIT 2.1-i (Continued)
I ' G u i l t ~
Verdict
Defendant I Convicced Or I
Judgment I withheld ~ ,
A I coodo= ~! Y i,~..., -,oo
• o - - ~
r
Io-..,..o I
C o n d u c t Zmte~,iew
C h o c k
D r z v e r
R ~ c o r d
Chock C r i m i n a l Record
I
21
EXHIBIT 2.1-i (Continued)
~ Social /Real ~h] Ager~y Chock~
I .
~ ~ Empl o ks Faro i 1 9/
<
,.R,-I
Rehabi li tatio Agency Check
I
~J
22
EXHIBIT 2.111 [Continued}
~r
Yes
Fzob.[(:'nl Dzin~rT
Non-"
Drinkez
No
Cacegory • --I Unidentified
~I wi,,o A,~lo~.| Jail |
Sentence | O n l y I
,1 I R e c o ~ d ehabi 2 i Ca Cion
I At¢end CourC
A1 coh~ l School
IEnter Driver 1 .~I Improvement |
L ~".~==' J
23
EXHIBIT 2.1-1 CContinued}
~ t c e n d AZcoholics Anon97r~us
I Atten~
Defensi ve Driving
]
R e h a b
RLCend Other Rehab
Terminate
~f
24
2 . 1 . 5 PRESENTENCE INVESTIGATION (Continued)
The presen.tence investigation will include snme combination of the following actions:
Defendan t i n t e r v i e w D r i v e r r e c o r d s check C r i m i n a l r e c o r d s check S o c i a l / h e a l t h agency c h e c k s F a m i l y / e m p l o y m e n t check R e h a b i l i t a t i o n agency checks Othe r g e n e r a l c o n t a c t r e p o r t s
During the defendant interview, an alcohol-propensity test may be given to assist in determining the probability that the defendant has a drinking problem. Based on this test, the defendant's interview, the defendant's prior driving record, and BAC, the presentence investigator may interview the defendant's family and employer, and law enforcement personnel in order to more accurately access the defendant's problem.
Having completed these tasks, the presentence investigator will classify the defendant as either a problem drinker, a non-problem drinker, or undefined. He may also make recommendations to the court for rehabilita- tive and reeducative measures. The following are possible presentence investigation classifications and recommendations:
PROBLEM DRINKER--reveals a definite problem drinking pattern, but is still capable of conducting the majority of social transactions. The presentence investigator normally formu- lates a referral to an agency with a rehabilitative program and Court Alcohol School.
NON-PROBLEM DRINKER--reveals an immoderate use of alcohol by the defendant, but not of a habitual nature. The presentence investigator formulates referral to a Court Alcohol School.
UNDEFINED DRINKER--adequate data to determine the extent of the defendant's problem was not available. Based on whatever information was available, the presentence investigator formu- lates a referral recommendation, usually to Court Alcohol School.
2.1.6 SENTENCE
The Court reviews the findings and recommendations of the presentence investigator, the pleas of the defense attorney, and other information presented by the defendant in mitigation of his penalty. The court then pronounces sentence, which sentence may be withheld if the defendant accepts probationary referral to a court-prescribed program. The following are some of the most common referrals:
• COURT ALCOHOL SCHOOL--the majority of the defendants are assigned to Court Alcohol School for reeducation in the problems and con- siderations involved in drinking and driving.
25
2.1.6 SENTENCE (Continued)
DRIVER IMPROVEMENT COUNSELING PROGRAM - the DICP receives "hard core" drinker-drivers. The program utilizes face-to-face counseling and other rehabilitation and reeducation resources and agencies available, e.g., Alcoholics Anonymous and Defensive Driving. The DICP Counselor monitors the defendant's probation while in DICP and may recommend suspension of driving privileges i£ the defendant fails to complete his probationary program.
FULL PENALTY Under Idaho Code 49-1102, the court may impose up to a six-month jail sentence and a fine of not more than three hundred dollars ($300). In addition, the Department of Law Enforcement may suspend the subject's driving privileges for ninety (90) days.
2.1.7 PROBATION FOLLOW UP
When a convicted DWI is placed on probation and is rearrested during that period, a notification is automatically generated by the ASAP computer system. This notification is forwarded to the violator's Pre-Sentence Investigator (PSI). The PSI in turn notifies the court of the probation violation.
2.1.8 JUDICIAL/REHABILITATION FLOW DATA
A summary of judicial/rehabilitation flow data for 1974 and 1975 is presented in Exhibit 2.1-2.
Received PSI Defendent Interviews Driver Records Check Criminal Records Check Social/Health Agency Check Family/Employer Interview Rehabilitation Agency Check Other Contacts
Classification A~enc~
Drinker Classifications Problem Non-Prob lem Unde fined
Rehabilitation Activit~
Referred to Rehabilitation Court Alcohol School DICP Defensive Driving Referred to Alcoholics Anonymous
1977 1511 5742 4993 77TV BTOT
86 45 274 619 111 80 129 116
7119 5644
2991 2548 3075 1630 3529 1959 1414 758
16 12 1339 612
37 6 797 341
2991 1696 998 845 1340 715 653 136
2890 1879 1722 1268 968 553 40 30 39 28
Note: Rehabilitation flow volumes are given in two figures, those referred sund those who attended. The attendance figures are present only for Court Alcohol School, DICP and Defensive Driving. These are the only agencies that report data back to the ASAP project. Volumes of referrals are based on data from the presentence investigators. Data for treatment no-shows or drop-outs is not collected.
27
The conviction rate for the ASAP operational period 1974-1975 was 89.7 percent. Of those convicted, 43.4 percent received presentence investigations. This represents an average caseload of 231 investigations for presentence investigator per year or an average of 19 per month.
Of those convicted DWI's who received presentence investigations, 37.4 percent were referred to some rehabilitation modality. Exhibit 2.1-3 presents a distribution of those referred to rehabilitation.
EXHIBIT 2 .1-3 DISTRIBUTION OF REFERRALS
1974 1975
I
I
l
-'I
Court Alcohol School DICP Defensive Driving Alcoholics Anonymous
.S96 .675
.33S .294
.014 .016
.013 .015
E x h i b i t 2 .1-4 p r e s e n t s a d i s t r i b u t i o n o f r e f e r r a l s f o r problem, non-problem and u n d e f i n e d d r i n k e r c l a s s e s f o r t he ASAP o p e r a t i o n a l p e r i o d 1974 - 1975.
EXHIBIT 2.1-4 REHABILITATION REFERRALS BY DRINKER CLASS
Prob lem N o n - P r o b l e m Undefined No % No % No
Court Alcohol School
DICP
Defens ive Dr iv ing
A l c o h o l i c s Anonymous
998 .334 1044 .349 948 .317 I
532 .350 504 .331 485 .319
0 . . . . 46 .657 24 .343 I
65 1.000 0 . . . . 0 . . . .
I
28
2.2 REHABILITATION MODALITY ASSIGNHENT CRITERIA
In formulating a rehabilitation treatment modality or combination of modalities, the presentence investigation must consider a number of variables. The flexi- bility of the investigator's decision depends to a great extent on the availa- bility of resources which are at his disposal. For non-problem drinkers, the presentence investigator may make referrals of Court Alcohol School and the Driver Improvement Counseling Program. For problem drinkers, these programs may not be as effective but, in lieu of other alternatives, the presentence investigator may make the referral, hoping that an open analysis of drinking driver behavior and attitudes may have an impact on the individual. For severe alcoholics, the presentence investigator may recommend detoxification and some form of mental or psychiatric counseling. The patient in this case may need vocational rehabilitation or extended family counseling to help him readjust. In making these decisions, the presentence investigator must consider the sub- jec£'s attitude to being rehabilitated, the success or failure of past efforts, and the likelihood that the subject would benefit sufficiently given the restricted availability of community resources.
2.3 REHABILITATION PARTICIPATION INCENTIVES IN IDAHO
P r o b a t i o n and w i t h h e l d judgment a r e w i d e l y used by t h e m a g i s t r a t e s to keep a c o n v i c t e d DWI unde r t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t he c o u r t . The normal p r o b a t i o n te rm i s s i x mon ths , bu t t h e law has been r e v i s e d to p r o v i d e f o r p e r i o d s o f up to two y e a r p r o b a t i o n s .
Issuing a withheld judgment gives the magistrate the ability to wait for a period of up to six months while the defendant attends required rehabilitation treatment before judgment is passed. Upon successful completion of the required rehabilitation, the case is usually dismissed.
2.4 REHABILITATION FOLLOW UP Ahq3 MONITORING
q"nere is no formal probation agency in Idaho that tracks misdemeanor DWI probations. If a DWI case is prosecuted as a felony, the case may then be assigned to a probation agency, but the DWI conviction is usually a misdemeanor. Presentence investigators assist court clerks in obtaining record checks on individuals to determine compliance with terms of proba- tion or withheld judgment. 1~ne presentence investigator monitors probation in some cases. A records check will be conducted after six months to determine compliance. Presentence investigators also utilize a service provided by the Evaluation Information System which automatically notifies the appropriate PSI if a subsequent DWI arrest occurs within six months of the original investigation. The Evaluation Information System will also provide a notification to the original presentence investigator when any presentence investigator requests information on the same person. This allows the presentence investigators to exchange previously-gathered information.
29
7 !
2.5 INTERACTION OF ASAP WITH COMMUNITY TREATMENT RESOURCES AND THE COURTS
The focal point o£ all ASAP activities with the courts and treatment resources is with the presentence investigator. The extent of their involve- ment depends totally on the rapport built during the performance of their duties. As the investigators work with magistrates and court personnel, the courts slowly change their habits and begin to gain confidence in the abilities and judgment of t h e investigator. Referral to a presentence investigator is entirely voluntary on the part of the magistrates, and after two and a half years of operation, the percentage of presentence investigations is increasing. The interaction of the presentence investigators with treatment resources also depends on the individual personalities of the presentence investigators. Two of the presentence investigators in the ASAP Eastern Idaho region helped set up a Halfway House because of the lack of treatment agencies in that region. They also spend their own time aiding their clients in entering treatment, detoxification, and other rehabilitation measures.
Other interaction consists of the information flow between ASAP and the courts. Court information is gathered by the presentence investigator whenever he is involved and, in other cases, notification of convictions are sent to the Department of Law Enforcement. The ASAP Evaluation Information System has been used to report presentence investigations by each magistrate to provide Project Management with information which can be used to improve the volume of investigations.
I n f o r m a t i o n f low between ASAP and t r e a t m e n t m o d a l i t i e s i s p r o v i d e d f o r C o u r t A lcoho l Schoo l , D r i v e r Improvement C o u n s e l i n g Program (DICP}, and D e f e n s i v e D r i v i n g when i t has been r e f e r r e d by a DICP C o u n s e l o r . O the r a g e n c i e s do no t r e p o r t a t t e n d a n c e , and knowledge i s based on r e f e r r a l s by t h e p r e s e n t e n c e i n v e s t i g a t o r . I f a c l i e n t i s r e f e r r e d and does no t a t t e n d , t h e p r o j e c t w i l l n o t be in fo rmed e x c e p t when t h e p r e s e n t e n c e i n v e s t i g a t o r sends a n o t i f i c a t i o n o f p r o b a t i o n v i o l a t i o n .
SO
3.0 EFFECTIVENESS OF REHABILITATION
In the following sections, constraints of rehabilitation evaluation and the effectiveness of Court Alcohol School, Driver Improvement Counseling Program and the Defensive Driving Course are discussed.
3.0.I CONSTRAINTS OF REHABILITATION EVALUATION
In order to determine if rehabilitation has had any effect on reducing alcohol related crashes or DWI arrest recidivism, it is necessary to determine that for a number of individuals who have attended a treatment modality, a significant number of them have changed their driving behavior to the extent that this could not be attributed to random fluctuations of data measuring behavior changes. Measuring a change in driving behavior implies that there is a standard of behavior which can be compared to their behavior after having attended rehabilitation. This standard cannot be a comparison of before and after measures, such as arrests or crashes per time period, because the risk of arrest has more than doubled since ASAP began operation and the crash reporting system has been improved to report a much higher percentage of crashes than were reported during baseline years. Therefore, even if a group of individuals experience no change in driving behavior, a higher crash and arrest recidivism rate would be expected.
The theoretical approach to circumvent the problem would be to set up a control group which would compare like groups, one sent to a rehabilitation modality and one not sent, during equal time periods with pertinent variables controlled or with large enough random samples to take care of differences. However, to implement control groups on a statewide basis would be an impos- sibility. Magistrates in urban localities are independent and their partici- pation would be purely voluntary.
Further problems complicating an evaluation of rehabilitation are the quality of data received. For example, arrest data is gathered from the' PSI, the Idaho State Police, and the Department of Law Enforcement. An individual may be arrested by an Idaho State Policeman and later issued a withheld judgment. This will not be reported to the Department of Law Enforcement by the courts, so only an arrest record will be received. If the individual is arrested by a local agency, issued a withheld judgment, and given a presentence investigation, then a record of arrest and convic- tion will be received from the PSI. If an individual is arrested by a local agency, convicted, but receives no presentence investigation, then a record of the arrest date and conviction will be received from the court. Thus, the ASAP Project must rely on three sources of data. If one of these sources reports the arrest or conviction data incorrectly, then multiple arrests and convictions may be received when in fact there was only one arrest and one conviction. There is no way to verify whether or not a person was re-arrested the same day as his case was disposed of for a previous arrest or whether the arrest data was erroneously reported as the conviction date by one of the originating agencies. Given the large volume of arrests that the ASAP project deals with yearly, there are not enough resources to begin to identify incorrect data and make corrections. The only consolation is that these data problems exist relatively constant by time, location and treatment modality so that if intra-modality comparisons are made, the data problems should affect comparison data in the same way.
31
3 . 0 , 1 CONSTRAINTS OF REHABILITATION EVALUATION
The recidivism data in Table IS of the Appendix H data gives number of recidivists for different time periods by the most frequently used combinn- tions of treatment modalities. This may be used to calculate percentages of recidivists for each modality. The Evaluation Information System has been used to create profiles of the people who were referred to the various modalities presented in Table 1S. This information was then analyzed to determine if significant differences exist.
3 . 0 . 2 PROFILES OF GROUPS REFERRED TO REHABILITATION MODALITIES
Detailed profiles of groups of individuals arrested during the ASAP operation and referred to a specific modality and presented in Section 8 of this study. These exhibits are:
Individuals Not Referred to Rehabilitation Individuals Referred to Rehabilitation Individuals Referred to Court Alcohol School Individuals Referred to Driver Improvement Counseling Program Individuals Referred to Defensive Driving Course Individuals Referred to CAS and DICP Individuals Referred to CAS and DDC Individuals Referred to CAS and Other Rehabilitation Individuals Referred to Other Rehabilitation
%.,
Summary data from t h e s e exhibits are presented in the following subsections.
3 . 0 . 3 RECIDIVISM ANALYSIS
Exhibit 3.0-i presents recidivism rates for non-treatment groups, treatment groups, DICP treatment groups, and DICP and CAS treatment groups, the number of persons entering and the number of persons who subsequently were rearrested prior to January I, 1976. These rates are presented based on the year in which the offenders entered in order to reduce the effects of exposure time during which the subjects could become recidivists.
Exhibit 3.0-2 presents a distribution of drinker classification for each treat- ment modality.
We compared and tested the recidivism rates for the total project for signifi- cant differences utilizing the Kolmogorov-Smirnov technique described in Section 7.3. We found no significant differences in the no treatment modality when measured against any treatment modality. We also found no significant differences in the composite treatment modality when measured against any treatment modality. We expected to find that some treatment would reduce recidivism rates and suspected that a distribution of drinker classifications might provide a reason why we found none.
32
Year En te red
1972 (1)
1973
1974
1975 (2)
F o t a l
E~IIBIT 3 .0 -1 RECIDIVISM RATES FOR TREATMENT MODALITIES
N o
T r e a t m e n t t o t a l Rec id
Al l T r e a t m e n t s
T o t a l Rec id
CAS
T o t a l Recid
DICP
T o t a l Recid
2147 763 35.5
4123 744 18.8
4409 459 10.4
3259 162 S.O
13939 2158 .155
403 130
1997 485
2125 277
1612 98
6137 990
32 .3
24 .3
13.0
6 .1
16.1
108 38 35.2
767 173 22.6
846 90 10.6
620 24 3.9
2341 325 13.9
15 6 4 .0
190 $4 28.4
305 42 13.8
165 15 9 .1
675 117 17.3
CAS ~ DICP
T o t a l Recid
0 - ~ -
229 49 21.
430 61 14.:
204 12 S.~
865 122 14.
~q (1) J u l y - December o n l y d a t a a v a i l a b l e .
(2) J a n u a r y - June o n l y d a t a a v a i l a b l e .
KS Values P c .05 P ~ .01
No T r e a t m e n t vs Al l T r e a t m e n t s No T r e a t m e n t vs CAS No T r e a t m e n t vs DICP No T r e a t m e n t vs CAS 6 DICP
All Treatments vs CAS All Treatments vs DICP All Treatments vs CAS 6 DICP
.021
.030
.054
.048
.033
.055
.049
CAS vs DICP .059
f .
[
[
I:-. [
F. [ !
I
[
!.
Ii L I_ E [
L I
We compared and tested the distribution of problem drinkers classified by a Presentence Investigation using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov technique described in Section 7.3. We found that Court Alcohol School was the only modality that had a significantly lower (P ~ .01) number of problem drinkers. That was disturbing because by the definition of a problem drinker, we expected the recidivism rates for Court Alcohol School to significantly lower also.
However, we also compared and tested the distribution of problem drinkers as estimated by the Evaluation Information System based upon NHTSA guidelines using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov technique described in Section 7.3. We found that the Driver Improvement Counseling Program had a singificantly higher (P • .01) number of problem drinkers than the no treatment, composite treat- ment or Court Alcohol School modalities. This was encouraging because the significant overrepresentation of problem drinkers in the DICP modality did not produce a significant difference in the recidivism rate.
We performed the same comparison on Court Alcohol School with DICP and the co~osite of Court Alcohol'School and DICP. We found both DICP and the com- posite of C~ and DICP to be significantly overrepresented with problem drinkers, whether classified as such by a presentence investigation or estimated by the Evaluation Information System.
3.0.4 EFFICIENCY ANALYSIS
Efficiency analyses are not possible because in most cases, hours expended, costs incurred, and the ntunbers of persons treated are not reported to the Idaho ASA/~. Without the use of either 403 funding, NIAAA funding or funding from A~d ~, there is little benefit to the rehabilitation agency to provide this information. Without complete data, meaningful cost and efficiency analyses are impossible.
Until the NIAAA Services for Drinking Drivers grant monies were received in late 1974, few, if any, alcohol rehabilitation resources existed. Resources such as the Driver Improvement Counseling Program, and Court Alcohol School received the majority of persons seeking treatment. These programs, however, are primarily reeducative with limited counseling. In a few instances, notably the CARES Center in Idaho Falls, attempts to mobilize community resources have been made. Two presentence investigators in Southern Idaho helped set up a half-way house in Pocatello.
34
EXHIBIT 3.0-2 DISTRIBUTION OF DRINKER CLASSIFICATIONS BY TREATMENT MODALITY
No All Treatment Treatments CAS DICP CAS ~ DICP 120 % 384 % 375 ,% 339 % 391 %
Est. Problem i07 . 2 1 4 167" .334 93 .186 181 .362 164 .328
KS Values P .05 P .01
No T r e a t m e n t vs A l l T r e a t m e n t s . 1 4 2 No T r e a t m e n t vs CAS . 1 4 3 No Treatment vs DICP .144 No Treatment vs CAS 6 DICP .142
Al l Treatments vs CAS .099 Al l Treatments vs DICP .I01 A11 Treatments vs CAS 6 DICP .098
.119
.121
.I17
CAS vs DICP .102 .122 CAS vs DICP 6 CAS .098 .119
35
4.0 ANALYSIS OF REHABILITATION MODALITY PROFILES
In o r d e r to make s t a t e m e n t s about the p r o f i l e g roups , t h o s e group c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which a r e most i n d i c a t i v e o f a l c o h o l - i n v o l v e m e n t were used in a r a n k i n g sys tem to o r d e r t h e m o d a l i t y types by most to l e a s t a l c o h o l - i n v o l v e d . The f o l l o w i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s were chosen:
• Average p o s i t i v e BAC • Average ALCADD • P e r c e n t problem d r i n k e r (de t e rmined by PSI) • P e r c e n t problem d r i n k e r ( e s t i m a t e d by the E v a l u a t i o n I n f o r m a t i o n
System} • Average number of DWI's • Average number of accidents
The modalities were then compared on each point with t he highest alcohol- involvement receiving 1 point and the lowest 8 points. The number of points was doubled for the number of DWI arrests, because this was judged to be the single most indicative indicator of alcohol-involvement.
T i e s s p l i t the number o f p o i n t s . The r e s u l t i n g p o i n t s c o r e s a r e shown in E x h i b i t 4 . 0 - 1 . The p e r c e n t a g e o f e s t i m a t e d problem d r i n k e r s was r anked wi th Other Trea tment r e c e i v i n g 1 p o i n t ( h i g h e s t a l c o h o l - i n v o l v e m e n t } and --CAS r e c e i v i n g 8 p o i n t s ( lowes t a l c o h o l - i n v o l v e m e n t ) . The r e s u l t i n g SCORE column was then o r d e r e d on the b a s i s o f lowes t to h i g h e s t s c o r e ~ting in a final ordering of the rehabilitation modalities. A compari- son of the ordering of the component indicators used (example: average positive BAC, average ALCADD) resulted in a determination of the indicator that most highly correlated with the final scoring order. That indicator is the number of estimated problem drinkers developed by the Evaluation Information System. The individual modalities may now be ranked according to their alcohol-involvement and profile comparisons made relative to them.
EXHIBIT 4.0-1
HODALITY ORDER BY ALCOHOL INVOLVEMENT
~loda l i ty D e s c r i p t i o n Score Order EPD EPD Order
Not R e f e r r e d CAS* CAS and DICP CAS and DDC DICP** DDC*** CAS and Other Rehab Other Trea tment
* Court Alcohol School ** Driver Improvement Counseling Program * ' * D e f e n s i v e Dr ive r Course
!I
36
4.0.1 ANALYSIS OF ALCOHOL-RELATED PROFILE INDICATORS
Exhibit 4.0-2 summarizes characteristics from the profiles which may be used to imply the extent of the drinking driving problem of indi- viduals in the group.
Note that the days to recidivism is taken from the column Average Days to T~pe I IArrest) Recidivism in the profiles. This does not necessarily mean recidivism from the program as explained in Section 5.0, Profile Methodology. This indicates the number of persons in the modality who were arrested twice during the five-year driver history. The days are averages of the time between arrests and this indicator is intended to tell something about the group itself and not the relative success or failure of the modality in reducing recidivism.
If the ordering of the modalities is truly largest percent drinker-drivers to smallest percent drinker-drivers, the alcohol indicators should follow relatively the same order. If they do not, then the ordering may not be completely correct or the size of the group that had ALCADD test scores, for example, may have been so small that random fluctuations caused the average ALCADD score to deviate.
Am examination of Exhibit 4.0-2 shows that Other Treatment has the highest average ALCADD score, largest percent problem drinkers, and highest percentage problem drinkers. The percent o£ drinker-drivers in other groups is closer together to the extent that conclusions about the group populations cannot be made. The group referred to Court Alcohol School had the lowest average number of DWI's and the smallest percent of problem drinkers.
The most useful indicator appears to average number of DWI's because it corrects automatically for the sample size and roughly follows the same order as the average positive BAC.
4.0.2 AN ANALYSIS OF DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE CHARACTERISTICS
The t r e a t m e n t m o d a l i t i e s were a g a i n o r d e r e d by t h e e x t e n t o£ a l c o h o l - involvement and relevant demographic data summarized in Exhibit 4.0-3 . For some of these characteristics, no apparent relationship with the ordering of the treatment modalities was found. The percent male seemed to be stable at about 90%. Other characteristics such as average age and average years in Idaho also do not appear related.
The p e r c e n t a g e o£ unemployed seems to r e l a t e h i g h l y w i th l a r g e p e r c e n t - ages o f d r i n k e r - d r i v e r s . The p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e group t h a t i s m a r r i e d a p p e a r s to be s m a l l e r f o r h i g h d r i n k e r - d r i v e r g roups and l a r g e r f o r t h o s e g roups w i th fewer d r i n k e r - d r i v e r s .
37
:.--- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,------ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
O0
EXHIBIT 4.0-2
ALCOHOL-RELATED PROFILE INDICATORS
A#g Avg Per ~ Avg Avg Avg Days No. Modality Pos ALCADD Cent No. No. Drvng to Recids
BAC Prob DWIs Accdnts Viols Recid (1 time) Drnkr
Es t . Prob Drnkrs
Sample Size
1. Other Treatmnt .163 17.1 71.5 1.79 .60 1.41
2. CAS and Other
Rehab .167 12.3 48 1.63 .56 1.88
3. CAS and DDC .153 14.4 37 1.67 .67 1.72
4. DDC .166 10.5 29.1 1.62 .47 1.34
5. DICP .166 11.4 43 1.66 .48 1.39
6. CAS and DICP .160 13.4 59 1.52 .44 1.24
7. Not Re fe r r ed .157 13.0 45 1.51 .31 1.13
8. CK5 .154 9.4 22 1.35 .46 1.21
297
407
426
367
270
309
324
313
138
29
60
38
124
135
110
89
49.0
34.7
35.6
34. I
36.2
32.8
21.4
18.6
500
115
230
167
500
500
500
500
I :g" ~. | . . : | | ' I ! 1 I
Co4 ~O
Modal i ty
EXHIBIT 4.0-3
DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF PROFILES
Pe r - Per- cen t Cent Unem- White ployed
1. Other Treatment 21.0
2. CAS ~ Other Rehab 14.0
3. CAS and DDC 9.9
4. DDC 10.9
5. DICP 18,6
6. CAS and DICP 10.7
7. Not Referred 16.6
8. CAS 10.3
Per - Avg Per - Income Avg Cent Years c e n t Sample
$6000 Age Male in Marr ied S ize • Idaho
51.8' 35.1 87.9 22.0 47.5 SO0
59 .7 35.8 91.7 18.7 47.6 115
50.1 34.6 92.0 22.7 47.7 230
56.8 34.0 86.2 19.5 49.3 167
45.9 35.4 90.9 23.2 45.5 500
41.8 35.1 89.8 22.2 52.4 500
46.7 36.0 92.7 19.7 47.6 500
48.8 35.0 85.3 21.4 43.8 500
81.6
88.5
85.7
88.9
90.2
87.4
85.6
90.5
[-
[
E [_ [
r !_
I i !_
L
l
L L
i 1
I.
5.0 PROFILE DEVELOPHENT HETHODOLOGY
In o r d e r t o d e v e l o p a p r o f i l e o f a s p e c i f i c g r o u p , t h e A l c o h o l Data Bank was u t i l i z e d as an i n p u t s o u r c e b e c a u s e o f i t s d a t a c o n t e n t and o r g a n i z a t i o n . As p r e v i o u s l y d i s c u s s e d in S e c t i o n 1 .2 ( E v a l u a t i o n I n f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m ) , t h e A l c o h o l Data Bank i s o r g a n i z e d so t h a t a11 a v a i l a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n from p a r t i c i p a t i n g a g e n c i e s r e l e v a n t t o an i n d i v i d u a l * s c a s e h i s t o r y i s s t o r e d as a c a s e , so t h a t t h e d a t a can l a t e r be a n a l y z e d t o p r o v i d e a more c o m p l e t e p i c t u r e i n t e r m s o f a l c o h o l - r e l a t e d d a t a t h a n can be o b t a i n e d a n y w h e r e e l s e i n t h e S t a t e .
E x h i b i t 5 . 0 - I d e p i c t s a l l p o s s i b l e d a t a t h a t i s a v a i l a b l e f o r c o m p i l a - t i o n . I f t h i s d a t a were p r e s e n t i n a l l c a s e s , t h e r e s u l t i n g p r o f i l e wou ld be v e r y c o m p l e t e . In a c t u a l i t y , h o w e v e r , d a t a i s a v a i l a b l e f rom an a g e n c y o n l y i f t h a t a g e n c y ha s had c o n t a c t w i t h t h e i n d i v i d u a l . Fo r i n s t a n c e , PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS a r e g a t h e r e d f rom t h e D r i v e r L i c e n s i n g Bureau a n ~ ' a v a i ] a b l e t o ASAP t h r o u g h t h e D e p a r t m e n t o f Law E n f o r c e m e n t . In a r andom s a m p l e o f obe h u n d r e d i n d i v i d u a l s a r r e s t e d f o r DWI, t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n was p r e s e n t i n o n l y 71 p e r c e n t o f t h e c a s e s , b e c a u s e t h e a r r e s t p o p u l a t i o n i s drawn n o t o n l y f rom l i c e n s e d I d a h o d r i v e r s b u t a l s o f rom o u t - o f - s t a t e d r i v e r s t o u r i n g i n I d a h o , m i g r a n t fa rm l a b o r e r s , u n l i c e n s e d r u r a l i n h a b i t a n t s and I n d i a n p o p u l a t i o n s , and o u t - o f - s t a t e m i l i t a r y s e r v i c e m e n t e m p o r a r i l y s t a t i o n e d i n Idaho~ PERSONAL DATA i s c o l l e c t e d by t h e p r e s e n t e n c e i n v e s t i g a t o r i n t h e p r o c e s s o f g a t h e r i n g s u b j e c t i n f o r m a t i o n b u t , i n 1973, o n l y 45 p e r c e n t o f t h e . c o n v i c t e d DNIs r e c e i v e d a presentence i n v e s t i g a t i o n and, of t h o s e , . o n l y a p p r o x i m a t e l y 90 p e r c e n t r e q u i r e d an i n - d e p t h i n v e s t i g a t i o n . T h e r e f o r e , p r e s e n t e n c e i n y e s t i g a t i o n d a t a t h a t i s p r e s e n t e d c a n n o t be r e p r e s e n t e d as a p e r c e n t a g e o f t h e s a m p l e g r o u p , b u t as a p e r c e n t - a ge o f t h e nu~nber i n t h e s a m p l e g r o u p wh ich had p r e s e n t e n c e i n v e s t i g a - t i o n s d o n e o n ' t h e m . For e x a m p l e , t h e RACIAL CHARACTERISTICS f o r t h e p r o f i l e o f d r i v e r s a r r e s t e d and r e f e r r e d t o t h e c o m b i n e d t r e a t m e n t m o d a l i t i e s o f C o u r t A l c o h o l S c h o o l and t h e D r i v e r I m p r o v e m e n t C o u n s e l - i n g P r o g r a m a r e p r e s e n t e d b e l o w , ..
Race Percent l~ite 160 8 8 . 3 B l a c k i .S A m e r i c a n I n d i a n I0 S .S M e x i c a n 9 4 . 9 O r i e n t a l 0 0 . 0 L a t i n 1 .S Other races 0 0.0
Race d a t a t o t a l 18"-r 99.--'T
In this example, the sample size was 228, and racial characteristics were a v a i l a b l e f o r 181 o r 7 9 . 4 p e r c e n t o f t h e s a m p l e . Of t h e t o t a l reported racial characteristics, 160 were white. This represents 8 8 . 3 9 7 p e r c e n t o f t h e t o t a l r a c i a l s a m p l e . The r e p o r t e d p e r c e n t a g e s do n o t t o t a l up t o one h u n d r e d p e r c e n t b e c a u s e o f t h e t r u n c a t i o n o f t h e l e a s t s i g n i f i c a n t d i g i t s .
REHABILITATION DATA i s i n c l u d e d i n t h e p r o f i l e and i s c o l l e c t e d f rom t h e C o u r t A l c o h o l S c h o o l and t h e D r i v e r Improvemen t C o u n s e l i n g Program (DICP). Anyone in the sample who attends the program may be reported
40
EXHIBIT 5.0-I
PROFILE DATA
Alcohol Data Bank Data Data Source
Department of Law Enforcement PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS Age Sex Height Weight
DRIVER EDUCATION Defensive Driving
REHABILITATION ATTENDANCE Court Alcohol School Driver Improvement Counseling Program
BAC TEST DATA BAC Test Results Refusals to Take BAC Test
DRIVING VIOLATION HISTORY Non-Alcohol-Related Violations Alcohol-Related Violations DWIs Accidents
PERSONAL DATA Employment Status Occupation Marital Status Years Married Years in Idaho Years Education Income Number Dependents Ethnic Group Religion
ALCOHOL-RELATED PERSONAL DATA ALCADD Test Score Drinker Classification
CRIMINAL HISTORY Misdemeanors Felonies Alcohol-Related Misdemeanors Alcohol-Related Felonies
DRINKER/DRIVER SUMMARIZATION DATA DWI Arrest Recidivism Rate DWI Arrest and Crash Recidivism Rate Estimated Drinker Classification
Driver Improvement Counseling Program Data
Court Alcohol School Instructor Data Driver Improvement Counseling Program Data
Department of Health and Welfare Department of Law Enforcement
Department of Law Enforcement/Idaho State Police/Court Conviction Data
Presentence Investigator
Presentence I n v e s t i g a t o r
Idaho Criminal Investigation Division/ FBI. Reported by presentence investi- gators.
ASAP Evaluation Information System
41
S.0 PROFILE DEVELOPHENT METHODOLOGY (Continued)
b y t h a t agency as h a v i n g a t t e n d e d ; t h e r e f o r e , t h e p e r c e n t a g e s as g i v e n below represent the percentage of the total sample that were reported as having attended the treatment.
Rehabilitation Data Percent Attended Defensive Driving 51 13.5 Attended DICP 88 38.5 At tended Cour t A lcoho l School 144 65.1
Using the sample sample as above, 31 out of 228 completed the Defensive Driving Course or 13.5, where 228 was the total sample size.
The DICP attendance figure is based on a record of completion. This does not include subjects who are currently enrolled in the program or subjects who attended one or more sessions and then dropped out or were dropped from the program." The number of subjects who attended Defensive Driving represent subjects who attended the Driver Improve- ment Counseling Program and were referred by one of the DICP Counselors to Defensive Driving.
Court A l c o h o l School p r e - and p o s t - t e s t s c o r e d a t a is p r e s e n t e d t o i n d i c a t e t h e improvement o f knowledge l e v e l o f t h e s t u d e n t . I t s h o u l d b e n o t e d t h a t a z e r o improvemen T may be a s t u d e n t who had a p e r f e c t s c o r e on b o t h t h e p r e - and p o s t - t e s t . A n e g a t i v e improvement means that the student scored higher on the pre-test than on the post-test. The percentages given are based on the total number of scores available for those persons attending Court Alcohol School.
BAC data is analyzed to determine the average BAC and the average posi- tive BAC. In addition, the number of subjects having only one BAC record, the number of subjects having two BAC records, three BAC records, etc., are tabulated, along with the percentage each group represents in relation to the total number of persons who had at least one BAC. The average BAC is calculated for each group. For example:
Percent Average i f 1 BAC Average i f 2 BACs Average i f 5 BACs Average if 4 BACs
.077
.156
.173
.165
For t h a t g roup who had t h r e e BACs, t h e a v e r a g e o f t h e i r BACs was .17 p e r c e n t . For DWIs t h a t r e f u s e d t o t a k e a BAC t e s t , t h e p e r c e n t a g e o£ t h e t o t a l sample t h a t r e f u s e d , o n c e , t w i c e , o r t h r e e o r more t i m e s i s c a l c u l a t e d .
ALCADD t e s t s a r e a d m i n i s t e r e d by t h e p r e s e n t e n c e i n v e s t i g a t o r s d u r i n g t h e d e f e n d a n t c o n t a c t i n t e r v i e w . A l t h o u g h e v e r y p r e s e n t e n c e i n v e s t i g a - t i o n i s s u p p o s e d t o i n c l u d e t h e t e s t , u s e v a r i e s w i d e l y a c c o r d i n g t o t h e h a b i t s o f t he i n d i v i d u a l p r e s e n t e n c e i n v e s t i g a t o r s . In a sample o f 300 p r e s e n t e n c e i n v e s t i g a t i o n s , an ALCADD s c o r e g r e a t e r t han 00 was r e p o r t e d in 118 (59 p e r c e n t ) c a s e s . ALCADD s c o r e s o f 00 were no t c o n s i d e r e d in the a n a l y s i s , b e c a u s e i t was n o t known w h e t h e r t h i s f i e l d was l e f t b l a n k o r f i l l e d w i th z e r o e s when t he t e s t was no t a d m i n i s t e r e d .
42
$.0 PROFILE DEVELOPHENT METIIODOLOGY ( C o n t i n u e d )
A n o t h e r c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s t h a t t h e r e i s a h i g h p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t even an o c c a s i o n a l d r i n k e r w i l l answer yes t o a t l e a s t one q u e s t i o n , so t h a t a s c o r e " o f 00 i s q u e s t i o n a b l e f o r a l l bu t t o t a l a b s t a i n e r s .
D r i n k e r c l a s s e s a r e p r e s e n t e d wheneve r p r e s e n t e n c e i n v e s t i g a t i o n (PSl) d a t a c l a s s i f y i n g prob lem d r i n k e r s was p r e s e n t . The p e r c e n t a g e s r e p r e s e n t t h e c a t e g o r y ' d i v i d e d by t h e sum o f t h e o c c u r r e n c e s o f cach c a t e g o r y .
E s t i m a t e d Problem D r i n k e r s c l a s s i f i c a t i o n i s a c o m p u t e r - a s s i g n e d c l a s s i f i c a t i o n based on i n f o r m a t i o n c o n t a i n e d i n t h e A l c o h o l Data Bank. The p e r c e n t a g e i s c a l c u l a t e d f rom t h e t o t a l s ample , b e c a u s e each member o f t h e sample goes t h r o u g h t h e e s t i m a t i o n p r o c e s s , n o t j u s t t h o s e t h a t have had p r e s e n t e n c e d r i n k e r c l a s s i f l c a t i o n s c o n d u c t e d on them. The E s t i m a t e d Problem D r i n k e r s C l a s s i f i c a t i o n was d e v e l o p e d f o r t h e p r o f i l e a n a l y s i s to v a l i d a t e t h e PSI d r i n k e r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n t e c h n i q u e s . Because o f t h e f a c t t h a t PSI d r i n k e r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s a r e no t a lways made, a c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o£ Non-Preb lem D r i n k e r may be made by t h e PSI on an i n i t i a l a r r e s t and on a s u b s e q u e n t a r r e s t may no t be u p d a t e d o r p e r - haps a p r e s e n t e n c e i n v e s t i g a t i o n was n o t r e q u e s t e d by t h e j u d g e . The E s t i m a t e d Problem D r i n k e r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , h o w e v e r , i s ba sed on t h e
• • * •
l a t e s t d a t a aqd may be c o n d u c t e d a t any t i m e . The o n l y 1 1 m l t a t z o n i s t h a t Non-Probiem D r i n k e r s c a n n o t be i s o l a t e d from U n d e f i n e d w i t h o u t d e f e n d a n t c o n t a c t d a t a , so t h a t o n l y p rob l em d r i n k e r s a r e i d e n t i f i e d .
The E v a l u a t i o n I n f o r m a t i o n System u s e s t h e f o l l o w i n g c r i t e r i a i n i d e n t i f y i n g p rob lem d r i n k e r s .
1. P S I ~ r e p o r t e d s u b j e c t was d i a g n o s e d as a n ' a l c o h o l i c by a c o m p e t e n t m e d i c a l or t r e a t m e n t f a c i l i t y
2. PSI r e p o r t e d s u b j e c t a d m i t s b e i n g a l c o h o l i c or p rob lem d r i n k e r
3. S u b j e c t has more t h a n two DWI a r r e s t s 4. S u b j e c t has two DWIs and a BAC o f .15 o r g r e a t e r S. S u b j e c t has two DWIs and an ALCADD s c o r e o f 12 or
g r e a t e r as r e p o r t e d by a PSI 6. S u b j e c t has one DWI, a p r i o r p l e a b a r g a i n e d a r r e s t
( i n a t t e n t i v e or r e c k l e s s d r i v i n g ) and an ALCADD s c o r e o f 12 o r g r e a t e r
For each p r o f i l e , t h e number o£ v i o l a t i o n s s t o r e d on t h e A lcoho l Data Bank are t a l l i e d and r e p o r t e d . Those s u b j e c t s hav ing on l y one DWI are t a l l i e d , the number hav ing two DWI a r r e s t s are t a l l i e d , and so f o r t h . The s i z e o f each group i s expressed as a pe rcen tage o f the t o t a l g roup o f s u b j e c t s hav ing one or more DWIs.
V i o ] a t i o n s on Alcoho l Data Bank Percent
1 DWl 165 72.3 2 DWls 49 21.4 3 DIVIs 12 S. 2 4 DWls 1 0.4 S+DWIs I 0.4 Average Number DWIs 1.35
For exalnple, one-time rec id i v i s t s (those with two DWIs) represented 21.4 percent o£ the sasnple who had one or more DWIs 49 = 214 (165+49+12+I+I).
43
S.0 PROFILE DEVELOPHENT METf~DDOLOGY (Continued)
The average number of DWIs is calculated by adding the total of all DWIs d£vided by the total sample size. The average number of non-alcohol- related violations is calculated by dividing violation groups by the ~umber of cases that contained moving violation history obtained from the Department of Law Enforcement. The reason for this is because the Department of Law Enforcement is the sole source for non-alcohol-related violations, whereas DtVI violations may be obtained from many sources. Accident average is calculated by d£viding by the total sample size.
Criminal investigation data 1-2 Misdemeanors 41 48.8 3-4 Misdemeanors 19 22.6 S+ Hisdemeanors 24 28 .5 Average number misdemeanors 3.47
Percent
For those subjects who had misdemeanors reported by a PSI, 48.8 percent had one or two misdemeanors (41 of 41+19+24). The average number of misdemeanors for those people who had misdemeanors was 3.47.
For each profile group, three t~pes of recidivism are calculated.
Type 1 DWI arrest Type 2 DWI arrest or crash .Type 3 DWI arrest, crash, or A/R violation
A/R violation.means a traffic violation with a BAC test or affidavit or refusal taken on the same day.
Average days to recidivism are calculated for I, 2 3 4 S time re- cidiv~sts for each o£ th e -three classes o£ recidiv~sts. ~
"j
l
i
_, , 44
6.0 PROFILE ANALYSIS OF TREATMENT GROUPS
In order to determine if there is a significant difference in socio-eccnomic factors of persons that are referred to rehabilitation, profiles were created using the methodology described in Section 5.0 for the following groups.
• Not Referred to Treatment • CAS • DICP • CAS and DICP
These profiles were compared using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov technique described in Section 7.3 for the following categories.
• BAC Distributions En~lo)rment Status
• Marital Status • Income • Age Distribution • Education
We noted no significant variations in the soci-economic factors of those not referTed to some treatment modality. 1~nis was surprising because the treatment groups had a significantly higher representation of problem drinkers as reported in Section 3.03 of this study.
45
EXHIBIT 6 . 0 - 1
BAC DISTRIBUTIONS
N
N e g a t i v e
.01 - .04
• 0 5 - . 0 9
• 1 0 - . 1 4
• 1 5 - . 1 9
• 2 0 - .24
.25 +
No T r e a t m e n t T o t a l g Cum
270
5 .018 .018
3 •011 .029
31 .114 .143
CAS T o t a l ~ Cum
DICP
382
1 1 .028 .028
1 .002 .030
T o t a l $ Cure
431
CAS ~ DICP T o t a l g Cum
424
6
5
34
85 .314 •457
85 .314 •771
41 .151 .921
20 .074 •995
38 .099 •129
7 .016 •016
3 •006 .022
3 1 . .071 .093
150
123
6 6
40
127 •332 •461
135 .353 .814
56 .146 .960
14 .036 .999
• 014 .014
• 011 •025
• 080 .105
• 353 •458
• 290 .748
.155 .903
.094 .997
125 . 290 .383
153 .354 .737
72 .167 .904
40 .092 .996
KS Values
No T r e a t m e n t vs CAS No T r e a t m e n t vs DICP No T r e a t m e n t vs CAS 6 DICP CAS vs DICP CAS vs CAS ~ DICP DICP vs CAS ~ DICP
P 4..05
• 1 0 8
• 1 0 6
• 1 0 6
• 106 • 096 .093
°
( ,
EXHIBIT 6 . 0 - 2
EMPLOYMENT STATUS
4~ " 4
N
F u l l Time
P a r t Time
Not Employed
Housewi fe
S t u d e n t s
R e t i r e d
No T r e a t m e n t T o t a l % Cum %
126
88 .698
8 . 0 6 3
21 .166
3 .023
3 .023
3 .023
CAS T o t a l %
426
318 . 7 4 6
26 .061
44 .103
10 .023
18 •042
10 •023
Cum % T o t a l
343
229
18
64 .
4
13
15
DICP %
.667
.052
• 186
.011
.037
.043
Cum % CAS ~ DICP
T o t a l % Cum %
392
304 .775
16 .040
42 .107
7 .017
10 .025
13 .033
KS Values P ~ . 0 S
No T r e a t m e n t vs CAS No T r e a t m e n t vs DICP No Trea tmen t vs CAS ~ DICP CAS vs DICP CAS vs CAS ~ DICP DICP vs CAS ~ DICP
• 1 3 8
• 1 4 2
• 140 • 099 • 095 • 100
!
. • [ ~ | . r
EXHIBIT 6 . 0 - 3 ~ R I T A L STATUS
N
Married
Single
Divorced
Separated
i',/~dowed
Other
No T r e a t m e n t Total ~ Cure
126
60 .476
CAS T o t a l
.438
Cure DICP
T o t a l
.455
Cum T o t a l
395
207
59 •309
15 •119
5 •039
7 •055
. . . .
422
185
340
155
91
64
18
15
0
110 .260
85 .201
24 .056
16 .037
2 •004
CAS 6 DICP Cum
.524
• 230
• 162
• 045
•037
97 .285
60 .176
19 .055
'7 .020
2 .005
KS V a l u e s
No T r e a t m e n t vs CAS No T r e a t m e n t vs DICP No T r e a t m e n t vs CAS 6 DICP CAS vs DICP CAS vs CAS 6 DICP DICP vs CAS 6 DICP
P ~ . 0 5
• 138 •142 • 139 .099 •095 .101
E ~ I I B I T 6 . 0 - 4 INCOME
4:ffi tO
N
Less Than 4000
4000 - 7999
8000 - 11999
12000 +
No T r e a t m e n t T o t a l ~ Cum
124
38 . 306 . 306
41 . 3 3 0 . 636
28 . 225 •861
17 . 2 3 6 . 9 9 7
CAS T o t a l Cum
413
112 .271 .217
168 .405 .676
86 .207 .883
47 .111 .994
T o t a l
324
101
123
69
31
DICP
•311
• 379
.212
• 094
Cum
.311
. 6 9 0
• 902
• 996
J ,
CAS 6 DICP T o t a l ~ Cum
362
76 .209 •209
171 .471 .680
79 .217 .897
36 .098 .995
KS V a l u e s
No T r e a t m e n t v s CAS No T r e a t m e n t v s DICP No T r e a t m e n t v s CAS 6 DICP CAS vs DICP CAS vs CAS ~ DICP DICP v s CAS ~ DICP
No T r e a t m e n t vs CAS No T r e a t m e n t vs DICP No T r e a t m e n t vs CAS 6 DICP CAS vs DICP CAS vs CAS 6 DICP DICP 6 CAS ~ DICP
p 4, .OS
• 093 • 092 .092 .093 .093 .092
EXHIBIT 6 . 0 - 6 EDUCATION
O l
N
Less Than 7
Less Than 10
Less Than 12
12
Less Than 16
16 and Up
No T r e a t m e n t T o t a l ~ Cure
124
8 .070 •070
20 .161 •231
52 .257 •488
45 .346 •834
13 .104 .938
CAS T o t a l T o t a l
DICP
8 •064 1•002
Cum
425
9 .047 •047
75 .176 •223
81 .189 .412
167 .392 .8O4
70 .164 .968
23 .053 1.021
359
14
76
76
124
41
.066
•224
•223
• 365
• 120
.022
Cum
.066
•290
•513
•878
•998
1.020
UAS ~ UIUl' T o t a l ~ Cum
380
17 .064 .064
67 .176 .240
96 •251 •491
136 •357 .848
50 .130 .978
14 .035 1.013
KS Values
No T r e a t m e n t vs CAS No T r e a t m e n t vs DICP No T r e a t m e n t vs CAS 6 DICP CAS vs DICP CAS vs CAS 6 DICP DICP vs CAS 6 DICP
P /-...05
• 1 3 9
• 143 •141 • 099 .096 .102
[
I- [
r [ r
Ii I l I l_ !. !
I. !; !!
I. I I
7 .0 HETHODOLOGY
D e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e v a r i o u s s t a t i s t i c a l m e t h o d o l o g i e s used in t h i s s t u d y a r e p r e s e n t e d in t h i s s e c t i o n . Also i n c l u d e d i s a d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e m e t h o d o l o g y used to d e v e l o p group p r o f i l e s f o r a n a l y s i s .
7 .1 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PERCENTAGES
In much e x p e r i m e n t a l work, we a r e a b l e t o g e t t h e p e r c e n t o c c u r r e n c e o f a g i v e n b e h a v i o r i n two or more i n d e p e n d e n t samples . Ne t h e n want t o know w h e t h e r t h e i n c i d e n c e o f t h i s b e h a v i o r i s r e l i a b l y d i f f e r e n t in t h e two g r o u p s . The f o l l o w i n g problem w i l l p r o v i d e an i l l u s t r a t i o n .
Example: In a s t u d y o£ c h e a t i n g among e l e m e n t a r y - s c h o o l c h i l d r e n ) 144 or 41.4~ o f 348 c h i l d r e n f rom homes o£ good s o c i o - e c o n o m i c s t a t u s were found t o have c h e a t e d on v a r i o u s t e s t s . In t h e same s t u d y , 133 or 50.2~ o f 265 c h i l d r e n from homes o f poor s o c i o - e c o n o m i c s t a t u s a l s o c h e a t e d on t h e same t e s t s . I s t h e r e a t r u e d i f f e r e n c e in t he i n c i d e n c e o f c h e a t i n g in t h e s e two g roups?
Let us set up the hypothesis tha t no t rue d i f f e rence ex is ts as between the percentages cheat ing in the two groups and tha t ) wi th respect to cheat ing) both samples have been randomly drawn from the same poup la t ion . A use fu l procedure in t e s t i n g t h i s n u l l hypothesis is to consider P1 (41.4~) and P2 (50.2~) as being independent determinat ions of the common popula- t i o n parameter) P; and to est imate P by poo l ing P1 and P2" A pooled est imate o f P iS obtained from the equat ion:
P = NIPI+ N2P 2
NI+ N 2
q being, o f course) (1 - - P).
The estimated percentages, P and Q, may now be put in formula to give the SE of the difference between PI and P2"
o r
~ [ ' ' ] = eQ ~+~
(SE of t h e difference between two uncorrelated percentages}
In the present example, P = 348 X 41.4 + 265 X 50.2 or 45.2~ and 348 + 265
q = (1 -- P) or 54.8~. Substituting these two values, we get
The difference between the two. percents P and P is 8.8~ (50.2 -- 41.4);
and dividing by 4.06 (CR= (P1 -- P2) -- 0 we get a CR o£ 2.17. Entering 0 PI-- P2
the table o£ CR values presented in Exhibit 7 .1 - I , we find that our CR exceeds 1.96 (.05 level) but does not reach 2.58 (.01 level) .
52
EXHIBIT 7.1-1
Tab le of CR Values , fo r use in d e t e r m i n i n g the s i g n i f i c a n c e of s t a t i s t i c s
Example: ~%en the df are 35 and cr = 2.03, the .OS in co]umn 3 means that 5 times in 100 trials a divergence as large as that obtained may be expected in the positive and negative directions under the null hypothesis.
Degreea of ProbabiJi ty (p ) Fz eedom 0.10 0.05 0.02 0.01
To d i s c o v e r w h e t h e r two groups d i f f e r s u f f i c i e n t l y in mean p e r f o r m a n c e t o e n a b l e us t o s ay w i t h c o n f i d e n c e t h a t t h e r e i s a d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e means o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n s from which t h e samplds were drawn, we need t o know t h e s t a n d a r d e r r o r o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e two sample means. Two s i t u a t i o n s a r i s e w i th r e s p e c t t o d i f f e r e n c e s b e t w e e n means: t h o s e in which the means are uncorrelated and those in which the means are correlated. Means are uncorrelated or independent when computed From different samp!es or from uncorrelated tests administered to the same s a m p l e .
THE SE OF THE DIFFERENCE [OD) WHEN MEANS ARE UNCORRELATED AND SAMPLES ARE LARGE.
The f o r m u l a f o r t h e SE o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n u n c o r r e l a t e d or i n d e - p e n d e n t means i s
( s t a n d a r d e r r o r o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e be tween u n c o r r e l a t e d means)
in which:
=xl = the SE of ~ e m~n of the ~r~ sarape =~= = ~ e S Z of ~ e mean of ~ e second sample ~D = the SE of the difference between ~ e two sampJe mea~
~a and N~ = sizes of ~e hvo samp|~
App l i ca t i on o f t h i s formula to a problem is shown in the f o l l ow ing example:
Example: In a study of abs t rac t reasoning, a sample of 83 twe l f t h -g rade boys and a sample of 95 twe l f th -g rade g i r l s scored as shown below on a t es~ o f abs t rac t reasoning:
S e x N M e a n a
G i r l s 95 29.21 11.56 Boys 83 30.92 7.81
Assuming t h a t our samples a r e random, would f u r t h e r t e s t i n g o f s i m i l a r g r o u p s o f boys and g r i l s g i v e v i r t u a l l y t h e same r e s u l t : o r would t h e d i f f e r e n c e in means be r e d u c e d t o ze ro o r even r e v e r s e d in f a v o r o f t h e g i r l s ?
To answer t h e s e q u e s t i o n s , we must compute t h e SE o f t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e two means.
95
= :FCI'S
= 1"48 (to two decimals)
54
7 . 2 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DIFFERENCE BET~EN HEANS ( C o n t i n u e d )
~"ne obtained difference between the means of the boys and girls is 1.71 (i.e., 30.92 - 29.21); and the SE of this difference (~D)is 1.46. As a first step in determining whether twelfth-grade boys and girls actually differ in mean ability, we shall set up a null hypothesis. This hypothesis asserts, that the difference between the population means of boys and girls Is zero and that--except for sampling accidents--mean differences from sample to sample will all be zero. Is the obtained mean difference of 1.71--in view of its SE--]arge enough to cast serious doubt on this null hypothesis?
To answer this question, we must compute a critical ratio or CR found by dividing the difference between the sample means by its standard error (CR = D/[D ). This operation reduced the obtained difference to a ¢ score, and enables us to measure it off along the base line of the sampling distribution of differences. In the present problem, CR = 1.71/1.46 or 1.17. l~en the N's of the samples are large (30 or more is "large"), the distribution of CR's is known to be normal around the true difference between the population means. In testing the null hypothesis, we set up a normal sampling distribution. The mean difference is set at zero (true difference) and the SD of this distribution of differences is 1.46(~) Our CR falls at 1.17 on the base line to the right of the mean O, and also at -1.17 to the left of this mean. We need to measure in both directions, since under the null hypothesis (true difference of zero) differences between sample means are as likely to be plus as minus--to fall above as below the mean difference of zero.
From a Table of Areas under the Normal Curve, Exhibit 7.2-1o we can determine that 38% X 2 or 76% of the cases in a normal distribution fall between the mean and + 1.17~D; and 24% of the cases fall outside these limits. This means That under the null hypothesis we can expect CR's as large as or larger than + 1.17 to occur "by chance" 24 times in 100 comparisons of the means of ?amples of twelfth-grade boys and girls on this test. A mean difference of + 1.71 (i.e., a CR of + 1.17), there- fore, might easily arise as a sampling fluctuation from zero, and is clearly not significant. Accordingly, we retain the null hypothesis since--as far as our tests to--there is no reason to believe twelfth- grade boys and girls actually differ in mean performance on abstract reasoning tests. With respect to reasoning as represented by our test, the two groups could well have been random samples from the same population.
In t h e analysis of t h e c h a n g e s in distribution, classical tests may n o t b e a p p r o p r i a t e , s i n c e t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n s may be skewed s i g n i f i c a n t l y from n o r m a l , The Kolmogorov-Smi rnov t e s t f o r Goodness o f F i t makes no a s s u m p t i o n s o f n o r m a l i t y and i s t h u s a p p r o p r i a t e f o r m e a s u r i n g s h i f t s in distributions.
The Kolmogorov-Smirnov test is based on the sample distribution function Fn(X), defined in the preceding section; the statistic used is the maxi- mum absolute deviation of Fn(X ) from Fo(X):
D . = m a x IF .Cx ) - .%Cx) I
(To be mathematically accurate, the word "sup"--for supremum or least upper bound--should be usedin place of "max," but it is not assumed that the reader is aware of this fine point.) 1~ne distribution of the random variable D , which is indeed a statistic and varies from sample t n o sample, has been computed under the assumption that the null hypo- thesis holds. The results are given in Exhibit .3-I for sample sizes up to n = 20, for various preselected values of a, called s~gnificance levels. It happens that the distribution does not depend on what Fo[X ) is, so the same table can be used in all such problems. For large values of n there are given asymptotic formulas.
This technique is extremely powerful; however, to obtain this power, some sensitivity is lost. The following example will illustrate both the technique and the sensitivity lost.
In an analysis of income levels of persons convicted of DWI and persons receiving withheld judgments during 1974, the following data was obtained:
EVALUATION HEASURE Convicted DWI Withheld Number Cum % Number Cum % Diff
INCOME
Less than $4000 26 27.7 4000-5999 26 SS.4 6000-7999 22 78.8 8000-9999 I0 89.4
7.3 KOLMOGOROV-SMIRNOV TEST FOR GOODNESS OF F IT (Continued)
In this case we have
146 1 . 3 6 4 8 8 8
- .235,
t h u s a d i f f e r e n c e o f 23 .5 p e r c e n t or more w i l l have to be measured t o be s i g n i f i c a n t at PL .OS.
Analysis of the percentage O f persons with incomes less than $8000 using a test for the significance of the difference between percentages (described in Section 7.1) shows a significant difference between these samples. Using the formula:
J + )
where:
P = PIN1 + P2N2
N 1 + N 2
Q = 1 - p
Ire have
74 + 32 P = - .726
146 '
Q = . 274
OD% = ~(.726 ) (. 274) (. 019 + .011) = 0077
CR = PI - P2 - 0
o%
CR = . 7 8 8 - .616 = 2.23
.077
g i v i n g P = .0258
Some s e n s i t i v i t y i s r e g a i n e d as sample s i z e s i n c r e a s e . At a sample s i z e o f 400, t h e KS t e c h n i q u e w i l l measure a change o f 9 . 6 p e r c e n t a t P=.05 , w h i l e t h e t e s t f o r d i f f e r e n c e s in p e r c e n t a g e s w i l l measure (assuming P=.S} 6 . 9 p e r c e n t a t P= .05 . Thus, t he u se o f t h e Kolmogorov-Smirnov t e c h n i q u e i s best made with large sample sizes; however, i t s ease of use makes i t desirable as a preliminary screening method when significant differences are expected. If no significance is found using the KS technique, the researcher can always use other techniques when appropriate.
R¢~Pcl Ihc h.yp~lhcl;c.~l d ;s l , ;hu l :on F ( s ) I f J~,, - m.'~i I F . ( x ) - r ( x ) I ¢ ~ ¢ c r d t t~,c I.'sbul.~lcd vml~
( F o r • - - .01 *r id .05, m lymp io l~ t 'o lmu la t £;~e vnlue~ which n i t Ioo hir, h--b~r I J ~r lccnt r~ • . 80)
58
7.4 " t " TEST OF SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN TWO SAMPLE MEANS (PAIRED VARIATES]
For purposes of analysis of pre- and post-test scores, the "t" test for significance between two sample means is appropriate. In this case, a paired variant formula is used where t is calculated as £ollows:
a t=
./z(~ - a)'
where ~ = ~i -- ~i
d l ~ x l i ~ z | l
~1 = " l " l l - - I l l e l~ , .
N : sample size
w~th I~ -- I degrees of freedom
The calculated "t" value is then compared to values obtained from a "t" Table similar to the table presented in Exhibit 7.4-i.
60
EXHIBIT 7 . 4 - 1 #
TABLE FOR ~t ~ TEST OF SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN TWO SAMPLE HEANS
* P i s t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f h a v i n g t t h i s l a r g e o r l a r g e r in s i z e by c h a n c e .
8 .0 SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
Detailed profiles of various treatment and no treatment groups, as well as recidivists and non-recidivists are presented in this section for those readers desirin E more detailed information.
I
62
I
I
J
IDAHO
EXHIBIT 8.0-i
ALCOHCL SAFETY ACTION nPDFILE ANALYSIS
1975 NOT nEFERRED
PROJECT
SEX
HE IGHT
WE IGHT
AGE
RACE
EMPLOYMENT
CCCUPATInN
SA~'PLE S, IZE :
MALES FE~AL~S
AVERAGE HEIGHT
AVERAGE WEIGHT
AVERAGE AGE AGE lq OR LESS AGE 20 - 24 AGE 25 - 29 AGE 30 - 34 AGE 35 - 3g AGE 40 - 4 4 AGE ~,5 - 4g AGE 50 - 5') AGE 60 ~,ND OVER
WHITE BLACK AMER ICA~ I~DIAN MEXICAN ORIENTAL LATI eTHER RACES
STATUS ~ULL-T I "E PART-TI~E NOT EM PL E'Y r-_D HOUS Ew I ~" STUDENTS ~ETIRED
TYPE UNE~PL ]Y ED PRnC / T FCH CLFRICAI l SALES SEQVICE~ AGQI CULTU~ E PROCESSING MACHINE TR ADES FA~PICATION / STRUCTUPAL OTHEQ
PEPAIR
N=(
N=!
N=(
N=(
N=(
N=(
N=(
500
3 5 q ) 3 3 3
26
3 4 2 ) 6 8 . g
3421 162.7
4421 3 6 . 0
47 73 73 3g 29 43 47 60 31
125) 107
0 13 5 0 0 0
1261 88
8 21
3 3 3
124) IB 12 7
12 12 13 2
12 6
30
q 2 . 7 ~ 7,2%
10,67 16,5~ 16.5r
8 . 8 ~ 6.5~ q,T~
1 0 . 6 ~ 13,5~ 7,07
85,6? O.OI
I0 .AH 4,0~. O.OT 0,0~ 0,0~
6 9 . 8 ~ 6 . 3 ~
1 6 . 6 t 2 .3~: 2 . 3 ~ 2 . 3 t
14,5~ g.6~
9,6~ g.6~
I0.4~ l .6~ 9,6~ 4.8~
24, I~'
63
E~IIBIT 8.0-1 (Cont inued)
YEARS IN IDAHO AVER AGF YEARS I 2 3
5 6- I0 I f - 1 5 1 6 - 2 0 21 ~,ND nVE.~
N=( IN IOA
~ E H A B I L I T t T I O N DATA ATTENOE, r} AT TENDErj ATTENr)ED
N= ( OEF. DRIVING OICP COUqT-S CHOCL
CNERT ALCOHCL SCHOCL n A T A N=( NEGATI V~ I ~PROVE~ENT ZERO IMPROVEMENT IMPROVE 4ENT l - ~
5-9 [0-14 15-19 20 -U P
MARITAL STATUS MARRIEO SINGLE OIVORCEr) ~,I COWED SEPEQAT3D CT HE R
N={
DEPENDENTS O l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 O
N=(
~EL IG ICN PRCTESTANT CATHOLIC JEWISH MORMON CTHE R
N=(
861 1 9 . 7
8 6 2 6 l 7 E
18 32
5 0 0 l 51 81 78
78 ; 2 0
27 27 16
3 3
126) 60 39 15
7 5 0
g3] 30 24 I0
8 15
l I 2 1 0 O I
87) 34 17
O 14 22
9.3~ 6 .g~ 2.3~K 6.9~ I . I ~ 8 .1H 6.9~K
20. g1~ 37.2~
20.2~ 16.2~ 15.6~
2 .SZ O.OZ
3 4 , 6 ~ 3 4 . 6 ~ 2 0 , 5 ~
3 . 8 T 3 . 8 ~
4 7 . 6 ~ 30.9~ 11.9T 5.5H 3.g~ O.O~
32.2~ 25.8~ I0.7~ 8.6~
16.1~ I .OZ
l .0~ O.O~ 0.01 I .Om
3g .Of Ig.SZ O.01r
16.0~ 25.2T
64
EXHIBIT 8 .0 -1
YEARS PARRIFD AVERAGE
I 2
3. 4
5-I0
II-15 16-20
20÷
EDUCATION AVERAGE YEARS
I -6 7-g
I0 I I 12 13
"14 15 i6
17 AND UP
INCOME LESS THAN $4000
4000-5999 0000 -7999 800o-9gqg
lOOOO-llgq9
12000-[3999
14000-1599q 16000-17999 l~OdO- 19 99g 20000-UP
BAC DATA AVERAGE mAC AVERAGE POSITIVE BAC
NEGATIVE • 01 - .04
,05 - ..Oq
• I0 - .14 ,15 - .19
• 20 - .24 • 25 +
REFUSED TEST ONCE TWICE 3 OR MO~E
(Continued)
N:( 4hi 12,I
8 5
3 3 9 2 4
12
N=( 124) I I . 0
8 20 12 20 43
6 5 2' 6 2
N=( 1241 38 20 21 18 I0 7 3 2 I 4
N=( 2701 ,154t .157~
5 3
31 85 85 41 20
N=( 500) 17
0 0
17.3'~ IO .8: :
6 .5V 6 . 5 ~
l q . 5 ~ 4, .3~ 8.6'~
2 6 . 0 ~
7.0~ 16.1~ 9,6Z
16.1~ 34,6~ 4,8~ 4,OZ 1,6Z 4,8~ 1,6~
30.6~
16,1~ 16.q~ 14,5~
8.0~ 5.6~ 2 .47 I.6~ 0 . 8 t 3.2T.
I .8Z I , I ~
I I .4Z
31,4Z 15,1T 7,4F.
3 , 4 ~ 0 . 0 ~ 0 . 0 7
65
Ol AGNCSTI C
EXHIBIT 8.0-1
TEST SCOPES AVERAGE
l - l l 12- lq 20.-2 q 30-3q 40 -4q 50-UP
AL CACO
(Continued)
N=( 76 13.0
42 tq 12
2 I 0
5 5 . 2 7 2 5 . 0 X 15 .7~
2 . 6 Z 1.3~ 0.0~
OR INKER CLASS
VIOLATIONS CN
CRIMINAL INVES
OATA PRCBLEM NON-PROBLE N' UNOEFINEP EST. PR:..'18. DRINKERS
N= (
ADB I OWl 2 OWl 3 OwI 4 Owl 5+ OWI AV ER AGE NO OwIS
N=(
I -2 Nr]N 3 -4 5 -b 7 -8 g UP AV ERAGE
AIR VIOLATICNS
NON AIR VIOL
]. ACCI DE~T 2 ACCIDENTS 3 ACCI OENTS
CR ~ORE aVER NO ACCICENTS
TIGATICN DaTA N=( L-2 MISOE.WEANORS 3-4 MI SOEMEANORS 5+ MISOEMEANORS AVG NO. MISDEMEANORS i-2 FELONIES ] -4 FEL']NI ES 5+ FELONIES AVG NO FELONIES [ - 2 A/R MISDEMEANORS 3-4 A/R ~ISDEMEANCIRS 5+ AIR MISOEMEANCRS 4VG NI') AIR MISDEMEANORS I - 2 A/R FELONIES 3 - 4 AIR FELONIES 5Q. A/R FELONIES AVG NO A/R FELONIES
120} 54 56 lO
107
500 I 332 l I O
38 10
9 L .51
151 43 2l I0 3
1.13
e2 25
g 0
.31
33) 14 L2
7 3 . 3 3
1 0 0
.03 7 7 1
1 . L 8 0 0 0
. 00
4 5 . 0 ~ 46.6@
8 . 3 T 2L .4~
66 . 4@ 22.0@
7.6@ 2 . 0 Z 1 .SZ
30.2@ 8.6@ 4 . 2 T 2 . 0 • 0 . 6 X
18.4@ 5.0~ 1.8@ 0.0~
4 2 . 4 ~ 3 6 , 3 ~ 2 1 , 2 ~
3,0~. 0 , 0 ~ 0 , 0 ~
2 1 , 2 ~ 21 ,?.m
3 . 0 ~
0.01 0.0~ 0.0~
66
_ .X IBIT 8 . o - z (Continued)
AVG ")AYS TC TYPE L RECID ]. 2 3 4, 5
i lO 76 30 28 12
AVG DAYS TC TYPE 2 RECID I 2 3 4 5
9B 84 42 44 12
AVG CAYS TC TYPE 3 RECID I 2 3 4 5
98 8~ 42 44 12
ASAP RF.CIDIVISM 88
213 ~AYS 225 DAYS 141 DAYS I01 DAYS
33 DAYS
221 DAYS 21q DAYS 133 DAYS
8! DAYS 33 DAYS
221 PAYS 219 DAYS 133 DAYS el DAYS 33 DAYS
324 DAYS
0
67
IDAHO
EXHIBIT 8 . 0 - 2
ALCOHOL SAFETY ACTION P~OFILE ANALYSIS
lq75 REFERREC
PROJECT
SEX
HE IGHT
wE IGHT
AGE
RACE
E~ PLC'VMEN T
SAMPLE SIZE :
MALES ~EMALES
AVERAGE HEIGHT
AVERAGE WEIGHT
AVERAGE AGE AGE Ig ,]R LESS AGE 20 - 24 AGE 25 - 29 AGE 30 - 34 AGE 35 - 39 AGE 40 - 44 AGE 45 - 4g AGE 50 - 5q AGE 60 A~C OVER
WHITE 6LACK AMERICAN INDIAN MEXICAN ORIENTAL LAT I N ETHER RACES
STATUS FULL-TIME 13A RT-T IME NOT EMPLOYED HOUSEWICE STUDENTS RETI"ED
N=I
N=(
N=(
N=(
N=(
N=(
CCCUPATION TYPE N:I UNEM PL OY ED PROF I T ECH CLERICAL I SALES SERVICES AGRICULTURE PRCCESSING ,"IA CH I N E T~ AOES FABRICATION / REPAIR ST~UCTUPAL ~TH_-'R
500
421! 374 47
416l 6 8 . 9
4161 163.5
4 2 8 ) 3 5 . 8
61 68 72 47 36 38 ~3 56 27
41g) 366
0 27 23 I 0 2
420; 305
24 52
6 15 18
414) 49 34 Ig 47 31 43 25 32 18
I16
88.81 l l . l Z
9,51 15,8m 16,g~ IO,gT
8,8~ 10.0~ 13.O~ 6,31
87.3~ 0.0~ 6 . 4 ~ 5.4~ 0.2~ 0.0~ 0,4~
7 2 . 6 ~ 5 , 7 ~
12 .3~ 1 . 4 7 3 . 5 ~ 4 . 2 Z
II,8~ 8.2~ 4.5Z
11,3~. 7,4~
tO,3~ 6.0Z 7,71~ 4.3~
28,0T
• • . o
EXHIBIT 8.0-2 (Continued}
YEARS IN IDAHO N=( AVERAGE YEARS IN IDA 1 2 3 4 5 b-lO l l - 1 5 Ib-20 21 AND OVER
2q2 ; 2 1 . 4
22 lO
7 6 8
37 21 34
147
REHARILITATION DATA N=( 500) ATTENDEi) DEf. DR IVING 68 ATTENDED DICP 12O AT TENDE.~ COURT-S CHOCL 212
SCHOOL DATA N=( 212) NEGATIVE IMPROVEMENT 5 ZERO IMPROVEMENT 0 IMPROVEMENT I -4 60
5 - 9 95 IO-14 41 15-19 3 20-UP 8
COURT ALCOHOL
STATUS N=( ~20) MARRIED 189 SINGLE 98 D I VO RC ED 86 wI DnWED 14 SEPERATFD 30 CT HE R 3
MARl TAL
N={ 314l 0 99 I 67 2 46 3 39
27 5 18 6 6 7 5 8 6 q 1
lO 0 II+ 0
DEPENDENTS
N=( 297) PROTESTANT lOO CATHOLIC 60 JEWISH 0 MORMCN 51 OTHER 86
VE BAC NEGATIVE ,Of - .04 .05 - .Oq . lO - .14 • 15 - . I g .20 - .24 • 25 +
ONCE TWICE 3 OR MORE
70
N=I 1641 12,0
23 14 q
lO 36 19 14 39
N=( 418 } 1 1 , 2
14 81 46 33
157 27 24 14 [5
7
N=( 410) 131
80 81 46 36 14 IO 3 2 7
N=( 3991 .153~ .157¢
I I 4
35 131 134
60 24
N=( 500} 30
2 0
1 4 , 0 ~ R , S I 5 , 4 ~ 6 , 0 1
21 . q ¢ 11,51E 8,51¢
2 3 , 7 ~
6 , 3 ~ l g ° 3 Z l l , O T
7 , 8 ~ 3 7 , 5 ~
6 . 4 ~ 5 , 7 ¢ 3 , 3 1 3.5~r 1 . 6 ~
31.9~ 1 9 , 5 ¢ 19.7~ I I . 2 ¢
8 . 7 T 3,41~ 2 , 4 ~ 0 , 7 ~ 0 , 4 ~ I . 7 ~
2,7 '~ 1 , 0 ~ 8 . 7 1
3 2 o 8 I 3 3 , 5 ~ 1 5 , 0 ~
6 . 0 ~
6.01 0.4R 0.01
.1 j.
J ]
J
'[ [
)
[
,[ [
l
I. [
L
L )
L L ,[
I
Ol AGNOSTIC
OR INKEE CLASS
Vl OLATI CNS CN
CRIMINAL INVES
EXHIBIT 8 .0 ,2 (Cont inued)
TEST SCORES N=( 227l AVERAGE ALCADD I I . 3 l - l l 134
12-19 67 20-29 20 3 0 - 3 9 4 ~o-4q 2 50-tJ P 0
DATA N=( 384 l PROBLEM 165 NO~-PRC@LEM 183 UNDEFINED 36 _=ST, PROS. DRINKERS 167
ADO N=( 500) I DwI 312 2 DWI I t 6 3 owI 43 4 OWl 12 5+ Dwl 12 AVERAGE NO DWlS 1 . 5 6
1-2 NON A/R VIOLATIONS 175 3-4 57 5-6 26 7-8 I I 9 UP 4 AVERAGE N']N AIR VIOL 1.42
5 g . O t 2 9 . 5 1
8 . 8 1 1 . 7 1 0 . 8 ~ 0 . 0 ~
4 2 . g I 4 7 . 6 1
9 . 3 ~ 3 3 . 4 7
6 2 . 4 ~ 2 3 . 2 ~
8 , 6 I 2 . 4 ~ 2 , 4 ~
3 5 . 0 1 I I . 4 ~ 5 . 2 ~ 2 . 2 ~ 0 . 8 1
I ACCIDENT 118 23.61 2 ACCIDENTS 40 8,0~ 3 ACCI D~:NTS 18 3 . 6 I 4 CR ~CRE I 0.2T AVER NO ACCIDENTS .51
TIGATI CN DATA N={ 133} t -2 MISDEMEANORS 67 3-4 MISDEMEANORS 33 5+ MISDEMEANORS 33 AVG NO, MISDEMEANORS 4,00 I -2 FELONIES 4 3 - ~ FELONIES l 5+ FELONIES 2 &VG N~ ;ELONIES . 1 2 I -2 AIR MISDEMEANORS 59 3-~ AIR MISDEMEANORS 9 5+ A/R MISDEMEANORS 6 AVG NO A/R MISDEMEANORS 1.36 I -2 AIR FELONIES 1 3-~ AIR FELONIES 0 5+ AIR FELONIES 0 AVG NO A/R FELONIES . 0 0
71
5 0 . 3 1 2 4 . 8 t 24 .81r
3 . 0 1 0 . 7 ~ 1 . 5 Z
4 4 . 3 ~ 6 . 7 1 4 . 5 ~
0 .7g l 0 . 0 1 0 . 0 ~
% '
- . _ _ . -
EXHIBIT 8.0-2 (Cont inued)
AVG DAYS TO TYPE I RECID l 2 3
5
L I 6 86 36 40 lO
AVG DAYS TO TYPE 2 RECID L 2 3
IOZ 82 69 5Z ZO
AVG DAYS TG TYPE 3 RECID ]. 2 3 4 5
L02 82 69 52 20
ASAP RECIDIVISM 86
281. DAYS ZL3 DAYS I Z 3 DAYS I L ? DAYS
c]3 DAYS
3ZO DAYS 192 DAYS I 13 DAYS 1.07 DAYS
79 DAYS
320 DAYS 192 DAYS I L3 DAYS 107 C'AYS
79 DAYS
Zg8 DAYS
72
IDAHO
EXHIBIT 8 .0 -3
ALCOHOL SAFETY ACTION PROFILE ANALYSIS
1975 CAS
SAMPLE SIZE :
PROJ ECT
500
SEX MALES FEMALES
N= ( 415) 354
61 8 5 . 3 ~ 1 4 . 6 ~
HE IGHT AVERAGE HEIGHT
N=( 4 1 5 l 6 8 , 9
WE IGHT
AGE
RACE
ENPLOYMENT
AVERAGE WEIGHT
AVERAGE AGE AGE 19 OR LESS AGE 20 - 24 AGE 25 - 29 AGE 30 - 34 AGE 35 - 39 AGE 40 - 44 AGE 45 - 49 AGE 50 - 59 AGE 60 AND OVER
WHITE BL AC K AMERICAN INDIAN MEXICAN ORIENTAL LATIN OTHER RACES
STATUS FULL-TIWE PA RT -T I ~4 E NOT EMPLOYED HOUS EW I F E STUDENTS RETI RED
N = ( 415l 1 6 3 . 5
N = (
N=(
N = (
OCCUPATION TYPE N=( UNEMPLOY ED PROF / T ECH CLERICAL / SALES SE RV ICES AGRI CULTUR E PROCESSING ~ACHINE TRADES FABRICATION / REPAIR STRUCTURAL OTHE R
DRINKER CLASS DATA PROBLEM NOLO- PRGB LE M UNDEFINED EST. PRO8, DRINKERS
N=!
Vl OLATI CNS GN AD B l OWl 2 DWI 3 DWI 4 DWI S+ OWI AVER AGE NO DWIS
N=(
I -2 NON A/R 3 - 4 5 - 6 7 - 8 q UP AVERAGE NON
VIOLA/IONS
A/R VIOL
l ACCI DENT 2 ACCI DENT 3 ACCI DENT 4 CR MORE AVER NO AC
S S
CICENTS
CRIMIkAL INVESTIGATION D 1-2 MI SOFM 3 - 4 M) SDEW 5+ MISOFME AVG NO, M) 1 -2 FELONI 3-4 FELON) 5@ FELONIE AVG NO FEL I -2 A/~ ~I 3-4 AIR MI
ATA N=( EANORS EANORS ANORS SDEMEANORS ES ES S ONIES SDEMEANORS SDEMEANORS
5. A AVG I-2 3-4 5* A AVG
/R MISDEMEANORS NO A/R MISDEWEANORS A/R FELONIES A/R FELONIES /R FELONIES NO A/R ~ELONIES
339) 144 145
50 L81
500) 288 124
64 14
g
1 . 6 6
161 61 24 I I
5 1.39
112 45 l l
2 , 48
103) 52 21 30
3.57 4 0 0
,04 40
9 5
1.06 l 0 0
.00
5 9 , 1 ~ 2 7 , 8 ~
9 . 6 Z 2 . 8 1 0 , 4 t O ,O I
4 2 . 4 T 42.7~ 14.71 3 6 . 2 ~
57.6Z 24.81 12,8~ 2.8~ 1.81
3 2 , 2 1 12.2~ 4.8~ 2.2~ 1.0~
22.4~ 9 . 0 ~ 2.2~ 0.4~
5 0 , 4 ~ 2 0 . 3 ' l 2 9 . 1 ~
3 . B Z O.OT O,Ot
3 8 . 8 Z 8 . 7 Z 4 . 8 I
o . g ~ 0 . 0 ~ O.OZ
81
EXHIBIT 8.0-4 (Continued)
AVG DAYS TO TYPE 1 REC ID l
2 3 4 5
124 128
42 28 lO
AVG DAYS TO TYPE 2 RECID L 2 3 4 5
I09 136
57 44 20
AVG DAYS TO TYPE 3 RECID Z 2 3 4 5
109 136
57
20
AS~P RECIDIVISM 88
2 55 DA YS 22.5 DAYS 136 DAYS
70 OA YS 63 DAYS
285 DA YS 211 DaYS t29 DAYS
65 DAYS .=2 DAYS
285 DAYS 211 DAYS 129 DAYS
65 DAYS 52 D&YS
2 70 DA YS
82
J
J
'[ [
I_- ,F,- [
I. '1 ,[ L I
1. b
SEX
HE IGHT
WE IGH T
AGE
RACE
EMPLOYMENT
IDAHO
EXHIBIT 8.0-5
ALCOHOL SAFETY ACTION PROFILE ANAL YSIS
1975 DOC
SA/~PLE S I Z E :
MALES FEMAL-S
AVERAGE HE IGHT
AVFRAGE WEIGHT
AVERAGE AGE AGE 19 nR LESS AGE 20 - 24 AGE 25 - 2g AGE 30 - 34 AGE 35 - 3g AGE 40 - 4~ AGE 45 - tt9 AGE 50 - 59 AGE 60 AND OVER
WHITE BLACK AMERICAN I ND IA~: MEXICAN OR I E NT AL LATIN OTHER RACES
STATUS FULL -T I~ E PART-T IUE NOT EMPLOYED HOUS EW I F E STUOENTS RETIRED
N=(
N={
N=(
N={
N=(
N= (
OCCUPATION TYPE N=( UNE~PLCY ED PROF / TECH CLERICAL / SALES SERVICES AGP. I CULTUR E PROCESS I NG MACHINE TRADES FARRICATION / REPAIR STRUCTURAL OTHER
83
PROJECT
167
131! I13
18
132) 6 8 . 5
1 3 2 I 159. I
1321 34.0
16 22 27 II 15 13 q
8 II
129 0 2
12 I 0 I
1661 lOO
g
16 3
13 5
145) g
17 I0 14 7 5 6
15 5
57
8 6 . 2 ~ 1 3 , 7 g
[ 2 . 1 ~ 1 6 . 6 T 2 0 . 4 ~
8 . 3 ~ 1 1 , 3 ~
9 . 8 X 6 . 8 ~ 6 . 0 ~ 8 . 3 ~
8 8 . 9 Z 0 . 0 ~
8 . 2 7 0 , 6 ~ 0 . 0 7 0 . 6 ~
6 8 . 4 T 6 , [ Z
I O , 9 Z 2 , 0 7 8 , 9 ~ 3 , 4 1
6 , 2 T l I . T Z
6 . 8 ~ 9.61~ 4 , 8 ~ 3 . 4 ~
1 0 . 3 ~ 3 . 6 Z
3 g , 3 ~
EXHIBIT 8.0-S (Continued)
YEARS IN I OAHO AVERAGE YEARS I 2 3 4 5 6-10 I I -15 16-ZO 2l AND OVER
N:I IN IDA
51 lq .5
6 2 l 3 I 5 I
I0 22
REHABILITATION DATA ATTENDED ATTENDED ATTENDED
N= ( DEF, DRIVING DICP COURT-S CHOCL
167l 50 51 14
COURT ALCOFIOL SCHOOL DATA NEGATIVE IMPROVEMENT ZERO I MPnOV~. MENT [ M PROV EMEN T 1-4
5-9 lO- I4 15-19 2D-UP
N= ( 14} 0 O 2
II l O 0
MARITAL ST ATI;S MARRIED S I NGLE DI VORC ED wl DOWED SEPCRATED OTHER
N= ( 146 72 45 20
2 7 O
t)E PENDENTS 0 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 l *
N=( 531 24 13 5 4 1 3 O I I 0 0 I
RELIGICN PROTESTANT CATHgL IC JEWISH MORMON ETHER
N=( 48; 24 I I O 4 9
I I . 7 7 3 . 9 ~
5 . 8 t
9 , 8 Z I . q Z
I q , 6 X 43 , l~
2 9 , 9 t 30.5t~
8 . 3 1
0,0'¢ O,Ot
14,2~ 78,5%
7.1T O.Ot 0,01:
4 9 . 3 ~ 3 0 . 8 t 13 ,6X
[ . 3 % 4 . 7 t O.O'Z
4 5 . 2 t 2 4 . 5 ~
9.4 '~ 7 , 5 t I . 8 t 5 , 6 t O,O7 1 . 8 t l , 8~ 0.01~ O,Ot 1.8'~
5 0 . O r 22.9 '=
O.OZ 8 . 3 ~
1 8 . 7 t
" 84
EX}tIBIT 8.0-5
YEARS MAR R I ED AVERAGE
1 2 3 4
5 - 1 0 1 1 - 1 5 1 6 - 2 0
20+
EDUCATI ON AVERAGE YEARS
I-6 7-9 I0 II 12 13 14 15 16
17 AND UP
INCOME LESS THAN $4000
4000-5999 6000-7999 BOO0 -qqgg
I0000- I I qqq I 2 0 0 0 - 1 3 9 9 9 I~000- 15qq9 16000- 1799g 18000- 19ggg 20000-UP
RAC DATA AVERAGE BAC AVERAGE POSITIVE BAC
NEGATIVE • OL, - .04
.05 - .Oq • I0- .14 .IS - .19 • 20 - .24 • 25 +
REFUSED TEST ONCE TWICE 3 CR WORE
(Cont£nued)
N=( ;~3 '9,8
2 3 I 0 g
2 4 2
N=( 147) 1 1 , 5
6 22 13 18 54
g 10
4 9 2
N=( 144) 45 37 25 20 10
2 1 0 2 2
N={ 138)
.161~
.166~ 4
I 15 2q 53
28 8
N=( [ 6 7 ) t2
2 0
8 . 6 ~ 13 .0~ 4 . 3 Z 0 . 0 ~
3 g . l ~ 8 . 6 T
17 .3Z 8 . 6 ~
14.9~ 8.8t
Ig.2~ 36.7~
6.87 2.7~ 6.1~
3 1 , 2 ~ 2 5 , 6 t 17 ,3~ 1 3 , 8 ~
6 , g ~ L , 3 t 0 . 6 T 0 , 0 ~ 1 , 3 ~ 1.3~
2 , 8 t 0 , 7 t
l O , 8 t 2 1 , 0 ~ 3 8 ° 4 7 2 0 , 2 t
5 , 7 t
7.1Z I.IT 0.01
r
ss \
EXHIBIT 8.0-5 (Continued)
DIAGNOSTIC TES
DRINKER CLASS
VIOLATIONS ON
T SCORES AV ER AG E l-ll
I2-1q 20-2 c) 30-3g 40 -~ g 50 -U P
ALCADD
DATA PROBLEM NO~- PROD, LEM UNDEFINED EST. PR(]P.. DRINKERS
~08 1 OWl 2 OWl ] OWl 4 OWl 5+ OWl AV ERAGE NO OwlS
N={ 68 1 0 . 5
50 l l
3 1 2 1
N=! 120) 35 81
4 57"
N=( 167) lO1
38 18 7 2
1.62
7 3 . 5 Z 16 . l~ 4.47
2.9Z
2 q . l ~ 6 7 . 5 7 3.3~
3 ~ . 1 7
6 0 . 4 t 22.7T lO.7Z 4.17 1.17
1-2 NON A/R 3-4 5-6 7-8 q UP AVERAGE NON
VInLATIONS 53 20 12 2 l
A/R VIOL 1.34
31.7~ l l . g ~ 7.17 I . i ~ 0.51(
CR I MI NAL
I ACCIDENT 49 29.3~ 2 ACCIOENTS I0 5.g7 3 ACCIDENTS 1 0.SZ 4 OR ,WORE 2 1 . I ~ ~VER NO ACCIDENTS .47
INVESTIGATION D I - 2 MI SDEM 3-4 MISDE~ 5÷ MI SDE~'E AVG NO. MI l - 2 FELONI 3 - 4 FE LI7NI 5÷ F EL 0,"11E AVG NO FEL I - 2 A/R MI 3-& A/R M I 5÷ A/R M IS AVG NO A/R
ATA N=( 571 EANORS 32 EANORS 15 AN OR S lO SDEMEANORS 2.98 ES 3 ES 0 S 2 ONIES .35 SDEMEANORS Z5 SDEMEANORS 2 DEMEANORS I
DATA N=( 391) PROBLEM 153 NON-PROBLEM 194 UNDEFINED 44 EST. PROB. DRINKERS 164
ADB N=! 5001 1 DW I 305 2 OWl 135 3 DWI 46 4 DWI q 5+ OWI 2 AVERAGE NO DWIS 1 . 5 2
1 -2 NON AIR VIOLATIONS 168 3 - 4 60 5 - 6 24 7 - 8 9 9 UP 0 AVERAGE NON A/R VIOL 1 . 2 4
5 1 , 2 ~ 2q .5¢ 1 4 . 2 ¢ 3.5% 0.7% O , 7 Z
3 9 . 1 ~ 4 9 . 6 ¢ 1 1 . 2 7 3 2 . 8 7
6 1 , 0 ~ 27.0%
9.2% 1 . 8 1 O,AT
33.6% 1 2 . 0 ~
4 . 8 ~ 1.8% O.O~
1 ACCIDENT l l 3 22.6% 2 ACCIDENTS 39 7.8% 3 ACCIDENTS 9 1 . 8 1 4 OR MORE 1 0.2% AVER NO ACCIDENTS , 4 4
INVESTIGATION DATA N=( 102) 1-2 MISDEMEANORS 57 3-4, MISDEMEANORS 21 5+ MISDEMEANORS 24 AVG NO, MISDEMEANORS 3,,18 1 - 2 FELONI ES 2 3-4 FELONI ES 0 5+ ~ELONIES 0 AVG NO FELONIES .02 1 -2 AIR MISDEMEANORS 59 3 - 4 AIR MISDEMEANORS 6 5+ A/R MISDEMEANORS 3 AVG NO A/R MISDEMEANORS 1,16 I - 2 AIR FELONIES 2 3 - 4 A/R FELONIES 0 5+ AIR FELONIES 0 AVG NO AIR FELONIES ,02
5 5 . B Z 2 0 . 5 t 23.5%
0 . 0 7 O. 0%
5 7 . 8 7 5 . 8 t 2 .9%
1 .9 | 0.0% 0.01
1 -" \ . ;
91 . . . . ""
EXHIBIT, 8.0-6 CContinued3
AVG DAYS TO TYPE I RECID 1 2 3
135 9Z 27
AVG DAYS TO TYPE 2 RECIO 1 2 3
5
117 l i d
48 4
17
AVG DAYS TC TYPE 3 RECID 1 2 3 ¢, 5
117 110 ~8
4 17
ASAP RECIDIVISN 71
223 DAYS 192 DAYS 13# DAYS
261 OA YS 1 83 DA YS 118 DAYS 120 DAYS
62 DAYS
261 DAYS 1 83 DAYS 118 DAYS 1 20 DAYS
62 DA YS
309 DAYS
92
SEX
ME IGHT
WE IGHT
AGE
RACE
EMFLQYMENT STA
IDAHO
EXHIBIT 8 . 0 - 7
ALCCHOL SAFETY ACTION PROFILE ANALYSIS
l q 7 5 CAS & DCC
SAMPLE S I Z E :
MALES FEMALES
AVERAGE I-EIGHT
AVERAGE wEIGhT
AVERAGE AGE AGE lq OR LESS AGE 20 - 24 AGE 25 - 29 AGE 30 - 34 AGE 3 5 - 39 AGE 40 - 44 AGE 45 - 4q AGE 50 - 59 AGE 60 AND OVER
WHITE BLACK AMERICAN I t~O IAN MEXICAN CR I E NT AL LATIN CTHER RACES
TUS FULL-TIME PART-TIMF NOT EMPLf~YED HOUSEWIFE STUDENTS RETIRED
N= (
N=I
N=I
N=|
N= (
N=(
GCCUPAT ION TYPE h=( UNEMPLOY ED PR C~ / T EC P CLERICAL / SALES SERVICES AGRI CULTUR E PROCESSING MACHINE TRADES FABRICATIO~ I P, EPAIR ST RUCTUI~ AL OTHER
PROJ ECT
230
200) 184
16
2 0 0 ! 6 8 . 8
2 0 0 l I6t.~
2 0 0 ) 3 4 , 6
16 42 32 25 l q [ 6 17 19 14
2 0 3 ) 174
2 9
18 O 0 O
202 ) 158
10 20
t 8 5
2021 [ 6 23 13 18 [ 5 22 13 16 13 53
9 2 . 0 Z 8 . 0 ~
8 . 0 t 21 .OZ 1 6 . 0 ~ 1 2 . 5 Z
9 . 5 9 8.0~[ 8 . 5 t 9 , 5 ¢ 7 , 0 Z
8 5 . 7 Z C . g ~ 4 . 4 Z 8 , 8 T O,OZ 0 , 0 ~ C.OZ
7 8 . 2 T 4 . 9 t 9 . 9 7 O . A t
2 . 4 t
7 , 9 ~ 1 1 . 3 ~
6 . 4 7 8 . 9 ~ 7 . 4 7
I O . 8 Z 6 . 4 ~ 7 . 9 ~ 6 . 4 ~
2 6 . 2 ~
93 ."
EXHIBIT 8.0 -7 (Continued}
YEA~S IN I DAHO &VERAGE YEARS l 2 3 4 5 6-I0 I I -15 [6-20 21 AND OVER
No( IN ID~
REHABILITATION DATA ATTENOED ATTENDED ATTENDED
No( DEF. DRIVING OICP COUQT-S CHOEL
Corer T ALCOHCL SCHOCL DATA No( NEGATIVE IMPROVEMENT ZERO IMPROVEMENT IMPROVEMENT [ -4
5-g I0-14 1 5 - 1 9 20-U P
wARITAL STATI)S MARRIED SI KGLE DIVORCED wI COWED SEPERATED OTHER
INVESTIGATION DATA N={ 521 I - 2 MISDEMEANORS 17 3-4 MI Sr)EMEANORS 16 5+ MISDEMEANORS l g AVG NO. MISDEMEANORS 4,57 I-2 FELONIES I 3 -4 FELONIES 0 5+ FELONIES 2 AVG NO .~ELONIES ,21 l - 2 A/~ uISDEMEANORS 28 3 - 4 AIR MISDEMEANORS 7 5+ AIR MISDEMEANORS 3 AVG NO AIR MISDEMEANORS 1 . 6 l I-2 AlP FELONIES I 3-4 A/R FELONIES 0 54" A/R F~LONIES 0 AVG NO AIR FELONIES .Of
101
3 2 . 6 t 3 0 , 7 ~ 3 6 . 5 t
0 . 0 ~ 3 . 8 t
5 3 , 8 ~ 1 3 . 4 ~
5 . 7 ~
1.9= 0 . 0 ~ 0 . 0 ~
EXHIBIT 8.0 -8 (Cont inued)
AVG OAYS TO TYPE l RECID 1 Z 3
5
AVG DAYS TO TYPE 2 RECID L 2 3 4 5
AVG DAYS TC TYPE 3 RECID L 2 3 4 5
ASAP REC [D IV ISM
29 16 21
4 6
24 20 27
8 6
24 20 27
8 6
18
¢73 DAYS 2¢8 DAYS 103 DAYS l O l DAYS
36 DAYS
666 DAYS 228 DAYS L20 DAYS
77 DAYS 36 DAYS
~46 DAYS 228 DAYS 120 DAYS
77 DAYS 36 DAYS
407 DAYS
. . J
\ ,
\" lO2
SEX
HE IGHT
WE IGHT
AGE
RACE
EM PLCIYMENT
IDAHO
EXHIBIT 8 . 0 - 9
ALCCH~L SAFETY ACT ION PROFILE ANALYSIS
1 q 7 5 GTHEP REHAB
SAMPLE SIZE :
MALES FEMALES
N= (
AVERAGE HEIGHT N=(
AVERAGE WEIGHT N=(
AVERAGE AGE AGE 19 OR LESS AGE 20 - 24 AGE 25 - 29 AGE 30 - 34 AGE 35 - 3 9 AGE 40 - 4 4 AGE 45 - 49 AGE 5O - 59 AGE60 AND (~VER
N=I
WHITE BL AC K AMERICAN INDIAN MEXICAN ORIENTAL LATIN OTHER RACES
N= {
STATUS FULL-TIME PART-T IME NOT EM PL,'DY ED HOUSEWIFE STUDENTS RETIRED
• N=(
OCCUPATION TYPE N={ UNEMPLOYED PROF / T =C H CLERICAL I SALES SERVICES AGRI CULT~R E PROC ESS I ,~JG MACHINE TRADES FABRICATION / REPAIR ST RUCTUR AL OT HE R
10.~
PROJECT
500
4 0 6 ) 357
49
4061 b 8 . 8
4 0 6 I 161.3
4 1 8 ) 3 5 ° i
39 79 68 50 25 42 41 52 22
4 0 9 I 334
3 56 15
0 O 1
4 0 9 ) 268
25 86 11
8 l l
4 0 4 ) 79 30 20 38 32 43 25 33 20 84
8 7 . 9 Z 1 2 . 0 ~
q,3Z 1 8 . 8 Z 16.27 II,?Z 5,q2
IO.O~ 9.8~
12,4Z 5.2~
8 1 , 6 ~ 0 , 7 ~
1 3 . 6 ~ 3°62[ O ° O t 0 , 0 ~ 0 . 2 ~
6 5 ° 5 Z 6 . 1 ~
2 1 . 0 ~ 2 o 6 ~ l o q ~ 2 . 6 ~
1 9 . 5 ~ 7 . 4 i i 4 . q ~ 9 , 4 ~
l O ° 6 Z 6 .17 , 8 ° 1 ~ 4 . 9 ~
2 0 . 7 ~
! / .
/
EXHIBIT 8.0-9 (Continued)
YEARS IN IDAHO N=( 280) AVERAGE YEARS IN IDA 2 2 . 0 1 21 2 13 3 7 6 10 5 6 6 - 1 0 25 11-15 21 1 6 - 2 0 32 21 AND OVER 167
BAT~ PROBLE~ NO~- p~C:ILE '~ UNr)E: I N:_n EST. PP]B. D=INK EQS
N=(
AD~ I GwI 2 DWl 3 ~wl 4 DwI 5+ DW I AVERAGE NO CwIS
.~=(
I - 2 NON A/~ VlOL,~TIGNS 3-4 5-6 7-8 9 !jo :V_'-PAG_-- NON A/R VIOL
I ACCI DeNT 2 ACCIO~NTS 3 ACCICENTS 4 t"a M.."Ip.E AV~'R NG ACCIPFNTS
CRI~I~AL I~VESTIGATIO~ DATA N:( I - 2 vI Sit EM EAH."I R S 3-4 ~I SDEMEANgRS 5+ "q I .~ D- ME A:qO: S AVG KO. ~IS'~E~EAIkORS I - 2 £-ELCINI ES 3 - 4 I:~=L3N[ ES 5+ F ELC',II E S AVG NO ~ELCNIES I-2 A/R ~,ISD~MEAN~]IRS 3-4 A/n MISD=_N~EAN~]~S 5+ A/R "JISCEMEANO~S AVG NO ~IR ~ISDEME.~NC~S 1-2 a/P FELONIES 3-4 A/n FELCKIES 5+ A/R ;ELCNIES AVE, I~ a/R FELONI2S
48) 77 51 IO 62
5 0 0 ) 396
77 t8 6 2
L . 2 7
132 40 20 7 I
.g6
80 21.
0 .26
14 8 4
2 . 5 0 0 0 0
.00 6 2 0
. 6 1 0 0 0
.00
37.7~ 52.0~ I 0 . 2 %
7 9 . 2 ~ 15.4¢
3 . 6 ~ 1.2% 0.~
2 6 . 4 T 8 . 0 ¢ 4.0~
0.2~
t6.0~ 4 . 2 ~ 0.8Z 0.0~
5 3 . 8 ~ 3 0 . 7 ¢ 15 .3T
0 . 0 ¢ O.0~ 0 , 0 ¢
2 3 . 0 ~ 7 . 5 F 0 . 0 ~
0 , 0 ~ 0.0~ 0.0~
111 . />
. . . . . . . EXHIBIT 8,0:lq ~Continued)
Al, r, DAYS TC TYPE I "~ECID 1 2 3
5
77 36 18 4 5
A~,G OAYS TC tYPE 2 RECID L 2 3
5
71 40 24 k2
5
A~G OAY$ TC TYPE 3 R-'_".ID 1 2 .3 4 5
71 40 24 12
5
418 ~AYS 2"/3 DAYS L24 DAYS 122 DAYS
25 naYS
457 DAYS 2(:7 DAYS 126 O AYS 6el DAYS 25 DAYS
457. DAYS 267 DAYS 126 DAYS
6q DAYS 25 DAYS
-T
L
i , 112
1
J
IDAHO
EXHI~ZT 8.0-11
ALCOHCL SAFETY ~CTlnN PROFILE AEALYSIS
].C~75 N~ T~EATMENT
PROJECT
RECTO
SEx
HEIGHT
WEIGHT
AGE
RACE
E).FLC~MENT
CCCUPATION
F,A~'PLE S I Z E :
~ALSS =E~LL~S
AVEQAGE hEIGI-T
AVERAGE WE IGHT
AVER=BE A(;E AGF 19 ~R LESS AGE 20 - 24 AGE 2'3 - 2q AGE 30 - 34 AGF 35 - 3q .~GE 4.0 - t.t, AGE ~,5 - 4q ~GE 50 - 59 AG3 60 ANF) GVER
WHITE BLACK -%U,E R IC A'.' I I~~ TAN MEXICAN CRIE~TaL LATI I~ CT HE I~ ~ 'CES
STATUS FULL-T I:-'E PA ~T -T I '* E NOT EM PL OY El" HOUS Ew I ; F. STUDENTS nETI ;Er)
T SCCRES N : ( L21 AV ER ac, E ,~,L C a EL') I~..7 L-LI 53
12-LO 30 2 0 - 2 q 25 3 0 - 3 q I0 40-4g L 5 0 - d P 2
CATA N : | 15q) PRCBLE~ l l q NG~-FRC3LEM 5]. UN.r=_FI NFO lq EST. PR~P. PRINKERS 32"/"
ADS N:( 5C0) I CW I 20 2 g'w I 262 3 OWI 124 4 DWI 56 5+ Owl 37 AV:_RAGE r~] CWIS 2 . 6 7
4 3 . 8 ~ 2 4 . 7 ~ 2 0 . 6 1
8 .2~ ' 0 .8~ ' 1 . 6 ~
~.2.gl 2~.91 lO.01 ~.5.5"-
4.0~. 52.4'~ 24.8~: iI.21~ 7.4~
I - 2 N.I~ a i r VIOLaTICNS 169 33.8~: 3-4 E5 I3.0'~ 5-b 27 5.41 7 - 8 14 2.8~ .I lip e 1.2 '~ AVERAGE ~,~(~N a/~ VIOL t.~2
i aCCI(']LNT ~6 17.21~ 2 AC C I r~i-,~iT S 41 8.2T 3 ACC I DJ ~,.T S 15 3.0:: 4 CR Mr2~.E 3 0 , 6 ~ AVER NO ACCI~.ENTS , 4 5
TI(;ATI Oil DATA N:( 7q) 1.-2 .~I SL .FM .:. ANO R S 30 3-4 N'1%F FMEANcIoS 21 5+ MIS'DT~E ANOPS 28 AVG N~. wISP, EMF_-Ah, ORS 4 , E 3 L-2 F~Lr)~I ES 4 3-4 ~:-L JXl ~ZS 0 5+ : ~LO~I IFS 3 ~vr, N'l ;~CL['NI~=S .56 I . -2 .~/'.:, uI SSE',4-ANDF S 37 3 - 4 AIR N'ISDE~EA~,!,]P,S 17 5+ ~1~ -.ISC,:~'~A',ICRS 6 ~,VG ~C ,',/R PISDE~EANLIRS L.q8 I -2 a /a F=.LONIES 2 3-4 a/o ;,r.-LCr, i lbS 0 5+ Al~ "ELCNIES 0 AV r, NC C/R ;ELONIES .03
3 7 . 9 ~
3 5 . 4 ~
C.O~ 3 .1%
4 6 . a ~ 2 1 . 5 ~
2 . 5 ~ 0.0~ 0.0~
\. " 116
EXHIBIT 8.LO-ll (Continued)
a~,,3 DaYS TO TYOE I ~:CII) I 2 3 4 5
2(:2 2~,E 168 I00
a2
A~,G GAYS TC TYPC ? RECIL) I 2
4 5
232 25~ 201 L32 95
A~,C, ~AYS PG TYPE 3 ~ECID L 2 3 4 5
232 25e 201 L32 q5
ASAF ~ R-_-C IF'IVISr.4 4qq
117
122 DAYS 131 DAYS 126 DAYS
~L DAYS 7~ DAYS
136 DAYS 126 DAYS I I ~ DAYS
80 DAYS 63 DAYS
L36 DAYS 126 DAYS L I 3 D~YS
EO DAYS E3 DAYS
2 9 ~ ~AYS
! ,"
....-"
SEX
WEIGHT
WEIGHT
-'. ~CE
=~'FLC'~MENT ST~
CCCuPA TI r~l
I O A H3
EXHIBIT 8 . 0 - 1 2
ALC~H~."L S a ~ : T ' f ACTION PROFIt.E AkALvSIS
IQ75 CaS RECIC
SAPPLE SIZE :
~ALES .=E,VALES
'/Vc..~,~GE HEIGHT
AVERAGE 'VE-IGhT
~v ER :C,E ~'GE AGF tq ~n LE.¢.~ AGE 20 - 24 ~G~ 2.5 - 2g AGE 30 - 34
AGE 40 - 44 AG~ 4q - 4~
~GE 50 - 5q ~GF 60 A'iO riVER
WH ITE BLACK AMER IC,~| I ~r" I AN MEXICAN ORIENTAL LAT [ G ~ H ~ oACE S
TU S FULL-TIME gART-T I~ " N,'IT EaPL(;YE..n HOUS E~,' I F'- STUDENTS RETI o.~
TYPE UNE~FLCY "-0 PR CF / T ~C CLE ~ ICAL / SALES 3.--=V ICES m;o I CI JLT;I,". PRCCES~Ir,G :~.~ C ~41 '.' F. r = -%) ES F=,~ICaT IO,'~ / S T RUCT'J~. ~L CT~EQ
~EPAIR
N=(
N=I
~ = (
N=(
h= (
.~=(
118
PROJECT
3 2 5
3061 273
33
3 0 5 ) 6 0 . 1
3051
3 0 g l 3 6 . 7
13 53 45 45 36 34 21 39 23
2 9 0 l 25~
l 25 lO
0 1 0
2Se)
22 44
4 5 6
2~0; ~7 22 20 37 24 ] 3 14 16 19 E~
~ q . 2 ~ I 0 . 7 ~
4.2~ 17.1m 14.5~ 14.SI~ I I .6~ I I . 0 ~ ' 6.7~
12.6~ 7.4~
8 . 6 ~ 3 . 4 ~
0 . 3 ~ O.OT
7 2 . 6 ~ 7 , 4 ~
1 4 , 8 ~ l o3~ ' l . b ~
2 o 0 ~
1 2 . 7 ~ 7 . 5 T 6 .8~ :
1 2 . 7 ~ 8 . 2 ~
I I . 3 ~ 4.Bi~ 5 . 5 ~ 6 . 5 ~
2 3 . 4 i i
3
[
[
).
[
I I
L
i I., )
L
L li
I,
'1.
EXHIBIT 8.0-12 (Cont inued)
YEARS I~, [ 3AH~] iV ER ,~GE YEARS I 2 3
5 6- I0 I f - 1 5 16-20 21 A~.3 ~VEP
IN IDA N=! 200
22.3 I0 7 8 7 5
19 I0 23
I12
~EPhBI LITATILIN ~ATA ATTENF,=D AT TEN~F,r) AT T E ~,L") E C)
N=( D~. DRIVING r~ICP C~URT-S CHOCL
~.25 47 7B
185
r. C LRT t.,tC 0 HCL SC H?,CL D~TA k=[ NEGATIVF I ~cRmVE~ENT ZE'~C] IV°i;,)V~M~t~T I M PRNV E.~N T I -4
5-0 ]0-14 15 -IO 20 -U
IB5
0 43 g3 30
4 7
PA;ITAL STATUS '~ARRIED S I ~,,q t _~ OlVqRCEn Wl DQW~_n ST-PERATrT. L~ CTH~ R
t O 0 0 0 - t l g g g 1200 O- 13':)9q 14000- [ 5~99 t600,')- tTqgO l,.~ 00,.i- I g gg g 20 :)00 -'.J P
~.mC OAT~ I~ERAGE ?.AC :%~,E:AGE POSITIVE .dAC
NEGATIVE . O l - .04
.05 - .0 ~]
.tO - .14
.t5 - .l n
.20 - .2 ~, • 25 ÷
aEFtJSEC TEST CNCE TW ICF 3 CR M,P.~, :
(Continued)
N:( IG6)
12 6 6 4
26 [g
12 21
l l . l lO ~2 34 26
I01 21
' I g 5
11 5
N:{ 285}
58 33 28 [8 12 2 0 2
N:( 432) • 163~ • le5~
5 7
32 t14 146 98 30
N=( 325) 26
I
0
l I , 3~ 5 . 6 Z 5 ,~ I . 3 . 7 ~
2 4 . 5 ~ L 7 , g ~ l l , 3 ~ l q , 8 ~
7 . 4 ~ 2 1 . 0 1 1 1 . 5 X
8 . R Z ~ 4 . 3 ~
7 . 1 4 6.41~ 1.71{ 3 . 7 7 1 . 7 1
28.4~ 17.8% 2C.3~ I I . 5 ~
6.3T 4.21 0.7~ 0.0!~ 0.7.I;
7 , 4 ~ 2b .3~ 3 3 , 7 ~ 2 2 . 6 ~
6 , g ~
0 . 3 ~ 0 . 0 1
,
120
DIAGNOSTIC
3r, I NKER CLASS
V ICLATI C.~S CN
CRI~IKAL
EXHIBIT 8.0-12 (Continued)
TEST SCCRFS N:( 166} AVERAGE ALCACD 10.4
t - l . t r i o 12-1. 9 37 2 0 - 2 g [6 30-3~ 3 4 0 - 4 9 C 50-U P 0
DATA N:( 264) DRCBLE~ fOe NO~-FRCBLEM 133 UNCEFINE~, 25 EST. PRF]F. DRINKERS 244
AO~ N:{ ~25l I DwI 21 2 OW I lq4 30w-I 77 4 CwI 21 5+ Dw [ 12 AVERA,.'..,E ~,0 Dw, IS 2 . 4 2
].-2 NON AIR VIOLATIONS 127 3 - 4 40 5 - 6 21 7 - 8 2 q UP 1 AVERAGE ~01~ AIR VIOL 1 . 3 8
~6.21 22.2~
9 , 6 ~
O.OI C.OT
4C.IZ 50.3~ q.4~
75.0 'Z
6 . 4 I 5 q . 6 1 2 3 . 6 1
6 , 4 ~ 3 . 6 ~
3 q , o z 1 2 . 3 ~
6 , 4 7 0 . 6 Z 0 . 3 ~
I ACCICE•T £q ?0.41 2 ACCI DE:Cr S 28 8.6~ 3 ACC I DEK!TS 15 4.61 4 CR MOR~ 4 1.21 AVER NO ACCICENTS .67
GATION O~T~, N : ! 122 2 ~I SO-MF_.A~!nI:S 64 4 MI SD-t4E:NnPS 30
M I SDE'-15 ANO~ S 2.8 4VG k n . ~ISGEMFA~ORS 3 . 2 5 I -2 FEL3~I.:S 5 3-4 ~ELO',I =S 2 5* : E L C N I E S 2 AVG Nn ~--LCNTES , 2 2 1-2 AIR MISDEMEAN(}RS ~3 3 - 4 AIR ,wIS,")EM~ANORS 11 5+ AI~ MIS['.~MEANOC:S 5 AVG NO Al~ 'wISDEM~ANCRS l . t 3 1-2 a i r ~EL3NIES I 3 - 4 e.IR r-EL:'Jt~IES 1 5+ AlP F::LCNIES 0 AVG NO A/R FEtqNI_.S .04
121
TNVESTT t- 3 - 5*
5 2 . 4 ~ 2 4 , 5 ~ 2 2 . 9 ~
4.0Z 1 . 6 Y 1 .6 t~
43.4~ q.O~ 4.0~
0.8T, 0.8~ 0.0%
EXHIBIT 8.0-12 CContinued)
A %G DAYS rC TY PE I R EC [D Z
5
194 154 63 40 t2
A~,C, DAYS TC TYP~ 2. R-CIP I 2 3 tt 5
164 176 q3 60 ~2
A~,~ DAYS TC TYPE 3 R'CID I 2 3 4 5
164 176
q3 60 32
ASAP R-C I.r) IVISM 325
le4 DAYS 1.E7 DAYS 134 DAYS I12 ~.AYS 55 DAYS
194 DAYS 138 DAYS 1.47 DAYS
95 DAYS 65 DAYS
194 DAYS 138 DAYS 1.47 DAYS
q5 DAYS 65 DAYS
300 OA YS
1~'~ J
'[
)
S ~
IDAHO
EXHIBIT 8.0-13
ALCO.~CL S~FET~ '~CTION PPOFIL- A~ALY~IS
PFOJE-T
Ig75 C&S NON-¢ECID .
SAMPLE SIZE :
~A L.=.S FEMALES
500
N=( 4C6) 349
57 85.gT, 14.01
wEIGHT AVERAC'" wEIGhT
N=( 406; 68.q
~51GHT
.4C-E
~CE
AVERAGE WEIGHT
AVERAGE AGE ASE l ) OR LESS AGE 20 - 24 AGE 25 - 2 ( AGE 30 - 34 AGE 35 - 39 6C, E ~0 - 44
AGE 50 - 5 Q. AGE 63 AND 9V_CR
WHITE. BL AC K AMERICAN IkF) IAN MEXI CAN ORIENTAL LATI N CTHER :ACES
N=( 406) 167.4
N=( 412J 34.8
53 78 Sq 28 37 44 42 S2 IO
N= ( 420 ) 382
3 12 21
1 0 l
12,8~ 18.qT 14.37
6 . 7 ~ 8.91
IC,6~ I 0 . I ~ 12.61 4 , 6 t
0 . 7 7 2 . 8 ~ 5 . 0 7 O . 2 Z 0 .0 '~ 0 . 2 1
EWFL~YMENT STA TUS FU LL-T l.U6 PA RT -T I K E NOT EMPL.]YED HOUS Ew I F E STUDENTS RETIRED
OCCUPATION TYPE N=( UNENPLCYCD PRCF / T-C~ CLERICAL I SALES SERVICES AGRI CULT~J ~. E PR CC ES S I ,~'G MACHINE T~ ~DES FABR ICAT IOk / REPAIR ST PUCTUP ~L OT H.=_ R
N= ( 4 ?
22 ) 16 25 46 8
[7 10
18) 46 41 42 #,2 27 43 17 lq 18 23
74,8~ 5.q~
lo,ql
4.07
2.31
II .0~ q.8E
lO,OI IG,OZ 6.%t
I0o21 4.0~ 4.5~[ 4.3~
• 2q . 4 ~ [
123 ....
_ E X H I R T T 8.~-1X..{('zmtinsmmL~ . ,
YEAPS IN 104H.] N={ 307l AVERAGE YEARS IN IO,a 2C.g l 18 2 13 3 g 4 I I 5 11 6-10 3 ~
II - 1 5 21 I(~-20 46 ?l A,~O OVE~ I~,2
~EMASILITATION DATA N=( 5~0) ATTENDED DE~. DRIVING 39 AT TENqFE; qICP 38 ~TTENOE~ COIJQT-S CHO~]L 281
CCL~T ALCCHCL SCHOCL DaTA N=( NEGATIVE IMPROVEMENT 7 E ~ ] I ~o~OV~MENT
5 - q i0-14 ].5-I 9 70 -U P
~ T T a L S T~TIJS N=( ~APR IFL) SI k C, L" DIVg~CEC
I CgW~ D SEPERATEC:
]Eo~NCENTS N=( O I
2 3 4
7
q
0 1+
~LIC, ICN op CT ES T_' ~JT CAT~ICL IC JEWISH wOOMCN CTHE~
TEST SCenES N:( 2~5) AV ER At, C aLC~CD g.5 l-ll lTe
12-1g 5~ 20-2g II 30-3 9 2 ~0 -4 g 0 50-~JP 0
CATA PRCBLEM NOLO- p-~cr~ L E~ UNDEF IN,_" C EST. PqC~. DRINKERS
N=(
AO~ I P.WI 2 OWl 3 Owl 4 Ow[ 5+ Ow I AV ~R AGE r , ; 3 0 w I S
N={
I - 2 f'ICN A/a VIL]L~TI3NS I - 4 5-6 7-d ? UP AVERAGE .'.~P~ A/F~ VIOL
]. aC C I CF"T 2 ACCI l~- ~T S 3 aCCI C~:'~T S ~. 'CR M,'Z.R 5 ,%VER '1~ ,:CCIC~I,~TS
I NVES TI GAT I C"! OATh N=( I - 2 v I SD -'-.'~ ~ ANOP S 3r-~ ~I S~ F"~ EAN.]RS 5+ ~IS.~E:~3 ANGUS AVG N ''~. .vISDE."I.~ANORS I - 2 F~LF, NIES 3-4 FE LC,', I ~S
w~OITAL 5T~TIIS MARRIE.] SI gC, LL Ul V lPC ":i) wI E)CIW F n SEPEQ-'~T ~f~ CT~E R
N=!
3EPE~DEKTS 0 1 2 3 4, 5 6 7 8 g
0 1÷
N=(
RELIGICk P~CTEST '~T C ~, I" -~ rl L IC JEWISH ~0 R~c.N CT~E R
134
?7 2 3 , 0
4. 3 3 1 0 5 6
15 50
117 .?i 58 31
3L) l 0
10 12
3 0 5
c..6) 39 2~ 16
6 q
0
31 26
6 12 13 0 2 t 0 0 0 0
37) 35 ].q 0
].2 22
4.. 5:: 3 . 4 1 3 . 4 . 1
C.OT 5 . 7 ~ 6 ,8 'Z
17 .2 'Z 5 7 . 6 !
6 q , 5 1 2 6 , 6 ~
3 , 2 ~ 0 , 0 ~
3 2 , 2 ~ 39 .7~I
q ,6~ . C ,0~;
16,1-Y
40.6T 29.14 16.6T 4..IT 9.31 O.OI
36.0~ 28.5~
13.1%~ 14..2~
O,OY 2.1Z I .0~ 0.0~ C.O'~ O.OT C.Oi
4 0 , 2 1 2 0 , 6 ~
0 . 0 ~ 1 3 , 7 1 25 .2 ~ .
EXHIBIT 8.0-15
YEARS aVE RAG =
i 2 3
5-10 I I - 1 5 1 6 - 2 0
2(2+
EELCATICN '~V F~ aGF Y-~PS
I - 6 7 - g
lO I I 12
1 4 15 16
17 AN[ ,J P
I I~ C ,']~ E
LESS
(Continued)
N: I 44 l l . O
7 6 1 l ,9
1 7
N : [ $5 I 0 . 5
6 26
q
33 5 4
I I 2
N:( q3} T,I~*' $4000 34
4G )O-5~,cg I h iJ O0 - 7 c~n g i g 3:~ ,30 -g c~c, q ] 7
l O 0 ; ' } - llC, g c) z~ 12 0 , . )0 - 1399 c; 2 I ~ O'.,i O- 15qgu l l~OJO- 1799~ 1 L q " ) ) O - 1 9 c,u~) 0 2O030-UP 3
rl~C DaTA ~ ~,ER AGE 6AC A~,,:R'GE PCSITIvG BAC
NEC, ATI V- .01 - .34 .05 - .Do . I 0 - . I t, .15 - . I o .23 - .24
. 2 5 +
ONCE TWICE 3 CO
REFUSEC TEST
N:( 181) .172X .175~
3 t g
46
30 2~
N:( I17 } 12
I 0
15 . c ~ 13.6%
2 . 2 ~ 2 . 2 5 I B . l ~ 2 g . 5 1
2 . 2 1 1 5 . q l
3.5~ 27 .3~
B . 4 ¢ 34.7Y
5 .2~ 4 .21 1 . 0 ~ 1 . 0 ~ 2.1~:
12.g~ 20 .4~ 18.2~ 4.3'~ 2.1~C l.O~' ! . 0 ~
O.OI 3 . 2 ~
1 .6~ ' 0 . 5 ~ 4 , g ~
2 5 . 4 ~ 3 6 . 4 ~ I ( : . S Z 1 4 . 3 ~
1 0 . 2 ¢ O , R I 0.01
135
HXHIBIT 8.0-15 (Continued)
O I &(,N£STI C
nRINKER CLASS
VICL,~TI F.~'S CN
C "-;, [ '~ [ IX 1 L [hIVES
TEST S C ,r.-~ E S I'~:( ~0 4V ERAG_ ~ .~t CA l~D 12 .7 l-It 3].
1 2 - t 9 17 20-20 8 3 0 - 3 0 ~0-~ q 0 50 -U P 0
CAT& N : | q6 PR rqt.=.,~ 55 kOh- I:R C.°,L.= ~ 24 UN C .:. ,: I N"-. ~ 15 -_-ST. P.~.:~F. F.,RI~K-r-,S i02
,.%.'3 £ N : ( 1] .71 1 C~,l 3 ~ CwI 53 3 0w I 3£
n4 l ].0 5 . BWI !.2 AVERt, r,,.'. N;J C w l S 2 . 8 2
t - 2 N ] ~ .'-I~ VI.']LZTI,.';NS :,6 3 - 4 16 5 - 6 5
-3 UP 2 -~VEPAr, - ~:.2N A / - : V I D L t , ~
t ACC I C.=*4T 30 2 ACCI P-NT S 15 3 ACC I n::.~T S 4 49.R M C14 ;5 2 AVE;, ~!C A C C I C E N T S ,~.g
3-~..,,w I 3 ..; F ;4 E A N .P, .= S 7 5+ '4 I .~ '3-: +'.'- '~N O: S 15 AVC, NO. ~ISI25~IEA~,]~S ~ .17 [ - 2 FEL.~r,.:I ~S .3 3-4 F - L 1P,~I FS 0 5+ r :ELS ' l I E S O aV,% h9 -.=.LC~.iIES .00 1 - 2 AIR ,vISD.r~I.=ANO=S 15 3-z. a / : .~ISI. E~=_A~:.~S 3 5+ ~ / ~ -~ISC~'~Ft~,~O~S 3 hV,3 N-- .,/q ~,IS,~E~=ANORS ]. .47 ].-2 a/~ FEL~,~ilF. S 0 3-~..~/:~ F I T L ( : ~ I ~ S 0
AVC, N~ .'.Ik ==L{I~,IEc. .OO
51,6Z 28.3Z 13.3% 6,6~ C.OZ 0,0~
5 ~ . 5 t 2 5 . 5 t t5,9~
2 . 5 Y 4 5 . 2 ~ 3 3 . 3 ~
1 0 . 2 ~
_~o.3~ 13.61l 4 . 2 ~ 4.211 1.711
1 2 . 8 m 3.4~
35,21 20,5% 44,11
0,0% O,O~- O,Oi
44.1~ B .8~
.B.8~
0.0~ 0 .0~
i(
136
[
)
[
[
[ I i .
E ¥ ~ T R T T R . N . I ~ .
A~,G DAYS TC TYPE I R~CI~ I 2 3 4 5
A~,G DAYS TC TYPE ? RECID I 2 3 4 5
A~,G DAYS TO TYPE 3 ~-CIO I 2
4 5
ASar~ REC IJIVISM
r C'.nn'r i nued~
53 78 -=0 3t 17
44 84
(o4
32
44 84 33 44 32
117
321 ['AYS 2C4 DA~S 132 DA~S
e4 DAYS 44 DAYS
3C0 DAYS ! ~e DAYS 113 DAYS
84 DArtS 40 DAYS
3C0 DA~S Z P. 8 DAYS l 13 PAYS
E4 DAYS 40 O^VS
275 DAYS
137
SEX
HEIGHT
WEIGHT
AC.~
~aC=
= ~' PL..']YWEN T
0 CCUP AT IC.;N
IDAHO
EXHIBIT 8 . 0 - 1 6
ALCOHOL S,~F_~TY ACTI']N ~ROJECT P~..q F I L? ~,~LYS IS
lqTS C~$ F CICn RECIO
SAWPLE SIZE : 122
r,l=( 1 1 4 ) iaA LES I lO FE PALF.-S 4
N = ( 1 1 4 l AVERAGE FE IGF, T 60.4
N=I 113l AVERAG= wSIGI-T 17~.7
N=( 117l AV ER/,C, ff aGE 3e .8 AGE lq ~3; LESS 7 AGE 20 - 24 17 AGE 25 - 2O 22 AGE 30 - 3/-, [~ AGE 35 - 3 ~ 7 AGE 40 - 44 }.0 AGE 45 - ~,9 lq AGE 50 - 5q 1'5 AGE 60 ANS OVE~ 6
N=( IC3) wHITE 86 8LACK 0 AMER IC-,'~ I ~ . IAN 8 ~'Exl CAN 8 CR I E,~TAI 0 LATI .N 0 CTH-~ QACF. S I
STA T:;S N=( i C g l FU LL-'r I.V E 81 PA RT -T I ;" E 4 NOT E~.4 ~L L']Y ED 1.6 HOUS EW I,~ E 1 STUOENTS 2 RETIREr~ S
TYPE N:{ I 0 6 ) UNE 'W GL CY E,L) lO PRC~ / T,-.Ch 5 CLE~,IC'-,L / SALES 2. SEQVICES 16 ~GQIC"LT~J~ E 13 PRCC ESS I ~G 7 N~A C H I ~ -..-- TR~ES 4 FA~IC~,TION / EEPAI~ 3 ST~UCTJet, L 8 CTH; Q 38
q6 . 6 ~ 3 . 5 ~ I
5 . 9 ~ ' [ 4 . 5 ~ 1.q. 8~ [ 1 . 9 ~
5 . q ~ 8 . 5 ~
1 6 . 2 T 1 2 . 8 ~ ;
5 . ] . ~
c ) ,O~ 7 . 7 ~ 7 . 7 ~ 0 . 0 ~ 0,0~ O.g~
7 4 . 3 ~ 3 . 6 ~
1 6 . 6 ~ G .q~
4 . 5 ~
@ . 6 T
4 . 7 ~ 1 . R I
1 5 . 0 ~ 12.21r
6 . 6 ~ 3 ° 7 ~ 2 . 8 ~ 7 , 5 ~
138
EXHIBIT 8 .0 -16 (Continued)
YEARS IN I D AHO AVFRiG'-. YEZ'RS I 2 3 4 5 5-10 11-15 16-20 • 21 AN'3 ,.lV_~ o
oRC~LEM NOk- P~C,Rt.E ~ U,NDE ; I N- ,,': -ST. P c ' ~ . ,")oI,NKE~S
N= {
AD~ I E'WI 2 OWl 3 OWl 4 ~wl 5+ Dw I
~,, .- r~L.~ Ov I S
,,'l= (
1- 2 NON 3 - 4 5-6 7 - ~ '¢ UP
AV E R.tGF
a/k VI('L ~T I ,-NS
.','3~ AIR vI~IL
ICg) ~0 3~ 13
lOB
122) ?
64 40 II
5 2.63
43 Ig 11 3 0
I.~6
I ~CCI OE~;T 34 2 ACC I D.=~;T S 14 3 -~CCI ~5,~,T S l 4 C ~, ~'C:- 1 AVER ~ ] ACCICE~,TS . 5 6
ATA N=( ? i ) EANPRS 15
~HC~5 10 Sr)E'~ E ~N,.I R S 3.51 ~'S O FS- 0 S 0 CNI~ . 00 S~E~t.A~ORS Z l SO~M ~NORS 4
MISDF~EANO~S 1 . 8 0 L . ' .hi ES 0 L~,~; I .= S 0 CNIES O = ~ L rlI',l I ES .00
T I C,%T I Cx~ r~ I - 2 ~w! S ~. E~ 3 - ~ MI 3'-..~M
AVC, N '~. ~I I - 2 FE L 'N I 3 -4 FE LF',~ I 5+ ~FLC~JIE ~VG ,~FI FEL 1-2 ~IR '~I 3 -4 AI~ Ul 5+ AlE v~IS AVG N ,'~ ~,/o I - 2 .~/q FE 3-4 ~I R FE 5* .~/R F EL AVC. I~C' A/c
141
41.9" 3S.~ 14.~2 4.gl C.OI 2.4~
55 .01 33.0~
38.5~
32.7~ @.0~ 4.05
35.21f 15.5~ g . O I 2.41~ 0 .0~
27.US I I .4~ 0.8'~ C.81
48 .5~ l q . 3 I 32 .21
O.OI 0 .0~ 0 . 0 5
67 .71 12.~5 6 . 4 2
O.OT 0 .0~ 0 .0~
EXHIBIT 8.0-16 (Continued)
Ab(; DAYS TC TYPE I :~CI. r) l
2. 3
5
80 ?3 12 11
~bG DAYS TC TYPE 2 ,~ECIO L 2 3 4 5
55 76 60 16 17
A~,G ~AYS TC TYPff 3 R~.CID I 2 3 4. 5
SS 7& 60 1.6 17
ASAP ;<..=.CIOIV!S~4 [22
416 DAYS [ ~8 DAYS 1=.3 D~YS
t 3 DAYS 62 DA~'S
4C2 DAYS i 47 OA ~rS 147 DAYS 60 DA YS 46 DAYS
4C2 DaYS }.e,? DAYS 147 DA~'S
C:O OA'vS 46 DAYS
3C6 DAYS
142
I "
)
~.EX
HEIGHT
WEIGHT
RaCE
'= M P L C Y w--'_ ~", T
cICCilP~T I?N
IDAHO
EXHIBIT 8 . 0 - 1 7
(WLC'~CL s%r-ETY ACTIOI~' PROJECT P;qFILE A~ALYS IS
1975 CAS V, DICP :',ION-I~ECI8
SAWPL r- SIZE : 5C0
N=( 412} MA L-:S 366 F~NAL~-S 46
N:( 4 1 3 1 AVERAGE HE IGHT hg._'.l
N : I 413) AVERAG= WEIGHT 162.7
N: I 429 ! ~.V ER .~c, ~ AGE 34.0 At..= I ~ 3~" L.:SS 55 AGE 20 - 2~ 78 AGF 25 - 2( } 64 AG~ 3,.q - 3 4 51 AGE 35 - 3 9 4~ AGE 40 - 44 44
AG~- 45 - 4~ 28 AC, F SO - 5 (~ 3g AGE 60 A~J~. ' :JVER 2E
N: I 378 l WHITe 3?8 BL ~C K 3
M-XlCAN 20 r-RIENT~:. 0 LATIN I CT H,: R ~.~CF S I
STATUS N= ( 3 8 7 ) F U L L - T I " C ~.@~ OA KT - " I ,'i E 1F: N~T EMPLOYED fi5 l lr lUS EW I ~ = g STIIOF_NT ~ ILl ~ E T I ~ 13
TYPE l~j:( 374) tlNFWCLC, E D 30 mRCF / - -CF 32
. r A CL=OI,.-,L / SALFS l,:J 3 - P V I C E S 38 AG ~I C'JL'UP E 3 2 P,~. CC ESS I ~'C, 28 ~ ' ~ , C H I ~ . TF v, OES 13 FA~RIC~TIt;N / P'_--PAI; 14 ST ~LI CT~J'-' AL 35 CTH~ ;, 134
143
l l , l ~
12 .~ I 18.1% 14.g~ I I . 8 ~ IO.2Y I0 .2~ 6.5~ g .Ot ~.C~
Co7~ 2.3~ E.R~ O.OI O.Zt C.2~
7 4 , 4 ~ 4o6X
1 1 . 6 ~ 2 . 3 ~ 3 . 6 7 3 . 3 ~
8 . 0 ~ 8 . 5 t , 4 . '8~
l O . I t 8 . 5 ~ 7 . 4 ~ 3 . 4 ~ 3 . 7 ~ g . 3 ~
3 5 . 8 ~
EXHIBIT 8 .0 -17 (Continued)
YEARS IN IDAHO AVERAGE" YEARS I 2 3 6 5 ~ - t O I I - 1 5 16-20 21 ~NO IVL::
N=( 7 4 4 ] IN IO~ 2 1 . C
25 l q 12
q
t l 32 22 48
l b b
R EHAB. I LI ,'raT ION DATA
AT TE ~C, ~-.]
N= ( 500 ) DEP. On IV I,~:G 7~ 51CP 221 C ~URT-S CHOF!..L 3CB
CCI.RT ~LC ~]MCL SCHUEL DATA ~=( 3C8) NEGATIVF IMFRqv E wE,',,T 5 ZE~:] IMP':.'3VE'~EP.'T 0
5 -a 14~ 10-14 46 1 5 - 1 q 3 20-UP 10
U~ClTAL S T ~'rus N:( 3891 M4RR I3,) 204 S I NC, LF.- gq DIVG;CE;= 58 '.,JI ..r, qw ED 12 3~. PE P A" ~: C, l E CT~!F .: 0
,~AC DATA -', ~ ER ~% G~. F:AC .'~',;RAG~ P']SITIVE @AC
NE OAT I V .- • 01 - . . )4 . 0 5 - . ' ] q . L O - . L ~ . . 1 5 - . ] 9 • 20 - . ~ 4 • 25 *
~EFUSE~ TEST CNCE TWICE
N:.( 217 IC.B
36 l b 15 g
54 2? 20 36
N=( 376) ii.I
14 5¢ 3q 55
143 25
8 12 3
N:( 3COl 85 73 qq
49 22 I I [ I
I 4 5
N : ( 3 7 4 ) • 1 5 4 ~ . • 1 5 7 ~
8 5
32 13B ] 0 4
55
N : ! 5 0 0 )
2 0
1 6 . ¢ S 7 . 5 1
4 . 2 ~ 2 5 . 3 e 1 2 . 6 ~
q . 3 ~ 1 6 . g l
6.0~ 15.6Y lO.B% 14.6e 3P .OT 6.6~ 4.TqR
2.1~ 3.1~ C . 7 ~
23.6~ 20 .2~ 27 .51 13.6~
3 ,0~ 3 .0~ 0 .2~
2 . L ~
8 . 5 ~ 3 6 . 8 T 2 7 . 5 ~ L 4 . 7 ~
8 . 5 Z
3 . 6 ~ 0 . 4 5 0 . 0 ~
145
EXHIBIT 8.0-17 (Cont inued)
O I AC, NCRTI C
2~. I NI~ER (.LASS
v IP, LATIC~S CN
C :~I '~ I N,:L I I'.VES
TEST SCORES AVFRAG. ~
l - L l L2-19 20-2':; 30 -3g (,0-4 ~ 50-UP
=L C~CL~ N : ( 2791
135 8B 40 I I
1
CAT~ PR CR LE,'4 NC)Ik-P~C~ LE w ~JNOEFIN~C EST. PR'I~. r~RINK~RS
N-(
aO8 i F)wl 2 Owl 3 OWl A Cwl 5+ Oil I
NC) ,';w I S
N=(
I - 2 l':r~N ~I~ VI~LATI,"3NS 3-z,
5-(', 7-8 9 U o AVFQAGE ~ON AI~ VIOL
i ~CC I ~.-.-NI" 2 ,ICC r 9;- x'r S 3 nCCl r)-Nr 5
4V-R h(; "CCIBENTS
T [ G.~.T I C'~ 0AT,' ,',J= ( i - 2 ~, I SO C,'k~NOnS 3 - 4 ~[ S,) .--~ EAr,~O RS 5+ '41SD-.C~NCOS AVG ~,3. ',~[S[3-~,~EANI3RS l - 2 F-_-L J"!I ~S 3-4 FEL I~[ES' 5+ ~ F L ] I I S S ~VG f ~ =::LCNIES 1-2 AIR vI¢,3EWc~t~RS 3 - 4 ~IQ MISOE~.EAN.I:',S 5+ A / ; :'~IS;3~'wE4~IC~-S IVC ~? AIR MISL')~HzA:I,')RS t - 2 a i r ~£LL3,"~IFS 3-4 A/R FEL'3~;IES 5+ ~/~- -ELCNIES ~,VG ~,C , /P ~LONIES
